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

The Worst

thoughtcrime.org

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

81–90 of 217 posts

Re: The Worst

#81

Post by zerovox »

crazygringo wrote: post #50

I think the authors of "The Best" and "The Worst" are both right. In fact, pretty much everything I own is either "the best" or "the worst" -- no middle ground. I identify the very few things that really make a difference to me (my laptop, my stereo, my kitchen pots & pans & knives, my jeans) and buy the absolute best I can afford. And I identify the things I don't really care about (the rug, the chairs, most kitchen…

I agree completely. It's about spending money in the right proportions. I spend what others would see as an unreasonable amount on my keyboard, computer screens and headphones. I spend a lot of time in front of my computer, it's my lively hood, so it makes sense to spend a proportionate amount of money on it, if they money spent makes a difference. I spend very little on more disposable things like socks or t-shirts. I bought 25 tea spoons for £2, I use them to stir my tea for about 2 seconds before throwing into the sink. I don't care if I lose them or if some housemates borrow them. It's about valuing things properly, purely from experience I know that better quality jeans and backpacks last longer, they're better value for money. I used to scrimp on those things, but it it's better economy not to. You simply don't need 'the best' cutlery you can buy, you use it and have to wash it up straight away because you don't have another fork for your desert. I'd rather have 10 pairs of cheap cutlery, and not need to run the dishwasher or get my hands dirty for a few days.

Re: The Worst

#82

Post by venomsnake »

I would never give up my keyboard with cherry blues. But if I happen to be in a situation where my "best keyboard" is unavailable I will hack with whatever idiotic input device I manage to get.

Same is with the ceramic knife, and everything else. I like the best, but I never allow myself the illusion that it is irreplaceable.

Re: The Worst

#83

Post by MichaelGG »

imgabe wrote: post #10

Thank you. That article about "The Best" bothered me in a way I couldn't completely verbalize. Beyond a certain threshold, the quality of objects just simply doesn't matter. The example of flatware was particularly annoying, because, really, in what way does a fork ever actually "fail"? Have you ever had food halfway to your mouth when the fork just suddenly collapses or something? As a tool, flatware is completely s…

Lots of flatware "fails" because the manufacturing is poor and leaves a nasty ridge on the bottom side, which is uncomfortable to hold. And plenty of cheaper forks/spoons seem to bend very easily. Sure, it's a small, but nevertheless annoying thing to deal with.

Declaring any particular design of flatware to be "the best" seems rather silly and just boasting of design they happen to like.

Re: The Worst

#84

Post by zerovox »

tptacek wrote: post #78
crazygringo wrote: post #50

I think the authors of "The Best" and "The Worst" are both right. In fact, pretty much everything I own is either "the best" or "the worst" -- no middle ground. I identify the very few things that really make a difference to me (my laptop, my stereo, my kitchen pots & pans & knives, my jeans) and buy the absolute best I can afford. And I identify the things I don't really care about (the rug, the chairs, most kitchen…

This is an argument against satisficing, since seeking the worst is a form of optimization. I don't want $50 spoons and I don't happen to want the worst spoons.

It depends on the function of the spoons. If it's to stir your tea for a few seconds, there's no need to spend money there, you're better off buying the cheapest spoons that perform that function (i.e they don't have holes in or are made of francium). If it's for hosting dinner parties, then clearly you want something more decorative and should spend an appropriate amount of money on them.

Re: The Worst

#85

Post by zerovox »

xianshou wrote: post #79
crazygringo wrote: post #50

I think the authors of "The Best" and "The Worst" are both right. In fact, pretty much everything I own is either "the best" or "the worst" -- no middle ground. I identify the very few things that really make a difference to me (my laptop, my stereo, my kitchen pots & pans & knives, my jeans) and buy the absolute best I can afford. And I identify the things I don't really care about (the rug, the chairs, most kitchen…

Well, well, Mr. Galt: "There are two sides to every issue: one side is right and the other is wrong, but the middle is always evil." Much as absolutism makes for simple priorities, applying these general principles out of any context is going to make you wrong no matter what you choose. As in game theory, where mixed strategies often defeat any individual strategy, the best, the worst, and the middle all encounter th…

> Personal possessions? I'm fine with the best or the worst, but not always. For instance, I could buy one of the world's most powerful supercomputers if I were rich enough, but I'm fine with my MacBook Air.

Well clearly, it's about what is best for you, not the best in general. For you, the MacBook Air is probably the best option. The fastest car in the world is not the best road car. The most powerful computer is not the best for surfing the web and running your ruby scripts.

Re: The Worst

#86

Post by [deleted] »

zerovox wrote: post #84
tptacek wrote: post #78

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This is an argument against satisficing, since seeking the worst is a form of optimization. I don't want $50 spoons and I don't happen to want the worst spoons.

It depends on the function of the spoons. If it's to stir your tea for a few seconds, there's no need to spend money there, you're better off buying the cheapest spoons that perform that function (i.e they don't have holes in or are made of francium). If it's for hosting dinner parties, then clearly you want something more decorative and should spend an appropriate amount of money on them.

[deleted]

Re: The Worst

#87

Post by weisser »

I put on the song "Wing$" by Macklemore (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gAg3uMlNyHA) right before I started reading "The Worst" completely by coincidence but the similarities in subject matter are striking:

"We are what we wear, we wear what we are

But see I look inside the mirror and think Phil Knight tricked us all

Will I stand for change, or stay in my box

These Nikes help me define me, but I'm trying to take mine, off"

Re: The Worst

#89

Post by LanceJones »

Can "the best" (or worst, for that matter) even exist without the element of subjectivity? In other words, is there a fixed set of quantifiable and objective measures for anything one purchases? Across how many attributes could you rate a set of kitchen utensils? I get "the fastest runner in the world" or the "top-ranked college basketball team in 2012" -- but the words "best" and "worst" rely on a person's [subjective] opinion.

Re: The Worst

#90

Post by CKKim »

Whenever these posts come up I question to myself whether an ideology for "stuff" is actually required, desirable, or helpful at all. They are usually thoroughly entertaining and informative, but I always leave feeling it's been therapy for the writer, a defense of their preferences whipped up into a reassuring formal-looking philosophy.

Like much writing, the damage is in the contextual assumptions imposed on the reader before the article even begins. Once you've started reading and focusing on the details of the piece, it's too late - you've unwittingly accepted the assumptions and are playing by the author's rules. In these cases, one such assumption is that an overarching, complete and consistent methodology can be applied to personal property in the first place (and that certainly if there's a good one then it can be knocked out in a few hours on a blog post...).

This is part of a larger pattern I'm falling into of scrutinously questioning the motives behind articles posted on personal blogs. I could be going in the wrong direction entirely but it seems very often to be validation-seeking behaviour, whether by submitting one's views for the approval of others, or simply that writing it all down gives it some mental gravitas to assuage personal doubts that the individual might be "doing it wrong". It certainly appears consistent with the range of submissions to Hacker News related to personal improvement (or, "lifehacking", as the internet seems to be running with these days).

Why did these authors write these two pieces? It's very difficult to analyse! If "for validation" seems a little condescending...well, I'd prefer it to the standard interpretation: "The Best" is unsubtle status-signaling, "The Worst" is equally unsubtle counter-signaling.

Post reply on HN