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

211–217 of 217 posts

Re: The Worst

#211

Post by jongold »

tptacek wrote: post #69
awakeasleep wrote: post #20

The dichotomy between Moxie and Dustin's posts illustrates an interesting split in the 'hacker' world. Wheras Hacker and Startup seemed to represent the use of unconventional tools to achieve a unexpected results (often) in unpleasant or tedious circumstances, those connotations have become mixed with the sense glamor usually reserved for celebrities. Now, the ostensibly boring (or at least detail-ridden, interesting…

Was Dustin Curtis or some company of his acquired, or is this just innuendo?

He was in an early YC class that exited.

Re: The Worst

#212

Post by freshhawk »

ShirtlessRod wrote: post #210
freshhawk wrote: post #163

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The idea here is the choice between: easy/disposable/cheap combined with a wide selection of possessions and requires research/lasts a long time/expensive combined with a minimal aesthetic about what you need to own. Don't get stuck on the semantic argument of if "best" means absolute single best, it's that idea that is the interesting and potentially powerful part.

That's a false dichotomy, though. There's no reason I can't have a minimal aesthetic about what I need to own while also getting some things that are "good enough" (maybe even "crappy"), and getting other things that may be considered the "best". The parent seemed to be saying that this state (i.e., between the two extremes) was "not very satisfying", and that without strictly adhering to "The Best" philosophy you'd…

Ah, I may have misinterpreted. I was assuming it was a given that one would choose either "the best" or "the worst" for each area of your life based on what's important to you. I took the "not very satisfying" part to refer to what happens when you regularly buy a specific thing that lives in the middle of those philosophies.

I agree that it would make perfect sense to have your choice about clothes differ from your choice about laptops or cars. A commitment to one philosophy for everything you own seems strict for no reason, although I have personally found that the minimalist aesthetic ends up spreading to seemingly unrelated parts of your life once you start enjoying it.

Re: The Worst

#213

Post by dgudkov »

JungleGymSam wrote: post #171
zacharyvoase wrote: post #45

It's really quite something when an author manages to put down in words a thought or a feeling you were hitherto incapable of expressing. Bravo. The dichotomy of best/worst — or, as I often think of it, acceptable versus available — is a tricky one, and it's not one which I feel I've yet solved. But I can certainly see how areas of my life tend towards the latter. Take my dotfiles, for example. I spent ages writing a…

I did the same experiment with Dvorak and had the same experience. At times my brain got really confused and I would mentally converge the convenient parts of both layouts (which brought up an idea of using predictive typing to use the most comfortable keystrokes of both layouts).

Interesting, why is it confusing to switch between two layouts? I speak both Russian and English and I can type without looking at the keyboard using either Russian or English layout (I'm sure this is not something outstanding). Perhaps when it comes to two layouts for the same language it might be more confusing.

Re: The Worst

#214

Post by basseq »

graue wrote: post #72
basseq wrote: post #46

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The threshold point is a good one, here. I think there's always a way to maximize the curve: getting the best quality fork you can find given your budget, needs, propensity of friends to start a spoon band, etc. To use Moxie's bike example, I wouldn't want to ride a rusty POS that's difficult to pedal and falls apart at every intersection any more than I'd want a five-figure custom carbon fiber jobbie that will be st…

Definitely agree with this. I ride a crappy bike I've been meaning to upgrade (it's heavy, rusted and tends to need lots of repairs), but the upside is no one's gonna work very hard to steal it. I'm loath to give up that peace of mind. For the same reason I was reluctant to upgrade my old, slow Dell netbook to a MacBook Air but I ultimately decided the tradeoff was worth it (big productivity gain). It depends on the…

My Global G-2, 8" chef's knife was not cheap, but it makes chopping shallots and tomatoes a joy. It's it by far better than the cheap crap you'd pick up at a department store.

However, spending an extra $1,500+ for a Bob Kramer 8" Carbon Steel Damascus Chef's Knife by Zwilling J.A. is not going to make a wild difference in my amateur chef'ing. And I would probably have an aneurysm every time it slipped and clanged off a mixing bowl.

Re: The Worst

#215

Post by by_Seeing »

As my friend Phelan put it: "The Best" and "The Worst" are both fascinating reads, although, in my opinion the authors completely missed the point. Here is my three-sentence rebuttal.

The point is not to place one’s possessions upon pedestals, only to bring them down for special occasions. In the same respect, appreciating something is not synonymous with being owned by it.

The point is to respect one's possessions, because they are the tools that enrich your life.

Re: The Worst

#216

Post by WettowelReactor »

blackman wrote: post #139

sounds like they are both optimising for value

Yes if you re-frame the whole discussion as pay for value then the concept of best or worst is irrelevant. What additional value does expensive cutlery provide over the bargain bin equivalent? Surly durability and use are comparable so it comes down to a subjective valuation of aesthetics. At the same token springing for quality stainless steel cookware can provide a lifetime of service vs. the cheap stuff.

Re: The Worst

#217

Post by charlieok »

As different as these two attitudes are, I'll stick up for Dustin Curtis by pointing out one thing he expressed in his post: the pleasure of owning a small number of things.

If I keep a small number of possessions, and their total value is a small fraction of the money I have in savings, I don't need to be too concerned about preserving them. I can easily replace anything that is damaged, lost or stolen, so these occurrences don't have to be a huge source of stress.

I like the idea of being able to go through everything I have and organize, clean and maintain all of it, say, once a week. If that's too much of a burden, that's a sign that I have too many things. Thinking in these terms also makes it very easy to give away things to lighten this load.

This thinking is partly informed by my experience maintaining software. Running and writing software means constantly keeping it up to date. New standards and new versions of dependencies are constantly being published, and security flaws are constantly being found, as Moxie Marlinspike certainly knows. Code needs to be updated to keep up with these things in order to be considered well-maintained or secure. Minimizing that burden gives you a better chance of keeping the quality high.

Post reply on HN