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

Why is it hard to buy things that work well?

danluu.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

201–210 of 542 posts

Re: Why is it hard to buy things that work well?

#201

Post by klodolph »

TOMDM wrote: post #194
klodolph wrote: post #118

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> …he'll use the same tone for something he's seen anecdotally and something he's spent a month personally investigating. A.k.a. “avoiding weasel words”. I don’t mean to be clever here, it’s just that it’s far more efficient to assume that reader can make their own informed decision, and give them citations & instructions for reproducibility to help them along the way, rather than shovel a bunch of weasel words into…

I agree some people hide behind uncertainty and "weasel" in order to avoid accountability for anything they say. What that requires though is they caveat everything. I really respect people who say they are 99% sure and 60% sure when appropriate. It requires a level of honesty not just to the audience but to the self to admit openly what you are and aren't sure about.

Is it more honest? Or is it just more self-centered, or more defensive, or more timid? Are you admitting that you aren’t sure about something, or are you brazenly assuming that people care about how confident you are about things, or are you defensively trying to say the least possible?

Framing this as a matter of “honesty” is, well reductive.

Your confidence is irrelevant to the discussion, unless there’s some particular reason which makes it relevant. A good reader should not hang much weight on your confidence anyway.

Re: Why is it hard to buy things that work well?

#202

Post by scarecrowbob »

klodolph wrote: post #162
Centigonal wrote: post #145

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I don't think what you're calling weasel words are weasel words. "Up to 50% faster!" is weasel wording. It says "slower or faster, but not more than 50% faster," but it sounds like it's saying faster. What GP is asking for is calibrating for uncertainty. Phrases like "I've seen this tendency in multiple teams I've been part of," or "study[ref] after study[ref] has confirmed this" help clarify what premises and hypoth…

> IMO It serves a useful purpose! I have to disagree! I simply do not understand what useful purpose it serves—IF we are allowed to assume that our readers have a proficient level of prose literacy. The default assumption, when someone is talking or writing, is that they are communicating their own opinions and thoughts, experiences, anecdotes. I don’t know about you, but when I think back to taking writing classes i…

"The ability to sort out opinions and anecdotes from factual claims and evidence is… well… something you’d expect from a proficient reader! "

The ability to communicate the level of confidence in a statement is something I hope for in proficient communicators.

Re: Why is it hard to buy things that work well?

#203

Post by Nextgrid »

cyounkins wrote: post #91

Great article! As a consumer that cares a lot about buying long-lasting quality products, here are a few resources: Project Farm (youtube.com/projectfarm) - Great independent reviews of tools Mcmaster.com - Higher quality products than you can get at your local hardware store and excellent customer service. When I've gotten the rare incorrect or damaged item, 1 email gets me a refund and a replacement overnighted. Wi…

Watch out - there’s evidence of Wirecutter soliciting bribes and suspiciously changing their reviews when their attempt turns out to be unsuccessful. See https://www.xdesk.com/wirecutter-standing-desk-review-pay-to....

Re: Why is it hard to buy things that work well?

#204

Post by radley »

chii wrote: post #44
0xbadcafebee wrote: post #2

Because we have unreasonable expectations. Making things work well is hard, and thus expensive. Take a chair, for example. Anyone can make a chair: just get a bucket, turn it over, and sit on it. Boom; backless chair. Want a backrest, arms? Get a 2x4, a saw, a drill, and some bolts. An hour later: Boom; chair. You want a chair that works well? How do you even define works well for a chair? Do you need cushioning? Do…

an aeron chair costs about $2000 dollars (give or take). The construction is sturdy, so i expect it to last at least 10 years, if not 20 (you take care of it etc). So the amortized cost is some 100-200 dollars a year for an excellent chair. If you buy a crappy chair, i bet that the cushion starts failing after a year or so of constant sitting. So you'd probably replace it yearly, or suffer a bad chair for a few years…

> an aeron chair costs about $2000 dollars (give or take).

Some people buy that $2000 chair when it's $350 and can still use it for years. The key is to learn what products remain quality products.

(And it's not about it being expensive. It's because it keeps your butt cool all year.)

Re: Why is it hard to buy things that work well?

#205

Post by dreeple15 »

scaramanga wrote: post #191
PragmaticPulp wrote: post #169

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> I will note that I often wish Dan Luu was a bit less apparently-uniformly-confident in some of the statements he writes. He does back up what he says, but he'll use the same tone for something he's seen anecdotally and something he's spent a month personally investigating. Dan Luu is one of my favorite currently-active bloggers. He's obviously a smart person with a good amount of experience in specific areas. Howev…

I think that's kind of the point. Dan Luu can change his priorities to do a performative display of what interviewers expect and then Dan Luu can pass a job interview. In which case you are not hiring Dan Luu, but a different guy who has most likely internalised a different world-view and set of values. Even if you assume he can compartmentalize his interview performance skills, he will have at least devoted time to…

[dead]

Re: Why is it hard to buy things that work well?

#206

Post by dreeple15 »

scaramanga wrote: post #191
PragmaticPulp wrote: post #169

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> I will note that I often wish Dan Luu was a bit less apparently-uniformly-confident in some of the statements he writes. He does back up what he says, but he'll use the same tone for something he's seen anecdotally and something he's spent a month personally investigating. Dan Luu is one of my favorite currently-active bloggers. He's obviously a smart person with a good amount of experience in specific areas. Howev…

I think that's kind of the point. Dan Luu can change his priorities to do a performative display of what interviewers expect and then Dan Luu can pass a job interview. In which case you are not hiring Dan Luu, but a different guy who has most likely internalised a different world-view and set of values. Even if you assume he can compartmentalize his interview performance skills, he will have at least devoted time to…

[dead]

Re: Why is it hard to buy things that work well?

#207

Post by bryanrasmussen »

PragmaticPulp wrote: post #200
scaramanga wrote: post #191

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I think that's kind of the point. Dan Luu can change his priorities to do a performative display of what interviewers expect and then Dan Luu can pass a job interview. In which case you are not hiring Dan Luu, but a different guy who has most likely internalised a different world-view and set of values. Even if you assume he can compartmentalize his interview performance skills, he will have at least devoted time to…

> I think that's kind of the point. Dan Luu can change his priorities to do a performative display of what interviewers expect and then Dan Luu can pass a job interview. This is the problematic logic I was trying to highlight: It's written as though he's infallible. He knows the correct answers to the interview questions, but he also deduces what his interviewers are thinking and why they're wrong . The other possibi…

I've not gotten the job offer from some interviews in which I aced the tech but in which I did not 'fit' (how do I know, well recruiters and people from company told me but also I knew, I often either breeze through interviews or I fail miserably and these I breezed)

In one interview where I would have gotten it but didn't the reason was basically I wasn't submissive, the tech lead was in my opinion rude and so when he made some technical mistakes I pointed them out. Why did I do that? Because I did not need the job. If I had needed the job I would have been submissive.

Perhaps a lot of interviews fail to hire Dan because the interview process is geared towards hiring someone who needs the job. Why is this? No idea, especially as lots of interviews take place with someone who already has a job and the new place wants to attract. But for some reason companies want to attract flies with vinegar and not honey, contra the old adage.

on edit: regarding on why I did that, well I also did it because the lead was rude. Otherwise I wouldn't have pointed out when they were wrong.

Re: Why is it hard to buy things that work well?

#208

Post by emodendroket »

giantg2 wrote: post #121
kortilla wrote: post #78

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Foundations change (tensioned slab, etc) and water inside of houses (copper vs pvc vs PEX vs lead). Electrical is even in frequent flux under those timescales. Insulation as well. Very little stays consistent…

But the concept of water being fed through pipe, from a reservoir, chlorination, etc have been around a long time. Sure implementation details change, but they and the concepts they build off of have been around. You mention pvc, copper, and pex (lead is over 50 years old and many have been replaced). Those are just materials. How do they affect end user on a daily basis? How long has electrical be 120v AC? How long…

That feels like we're stretching the claim a whole lot. The "basic concept" of a Tesla isn't that different than a Model T but I think most people would reject the claim that cars haven't really changed much.

Re: Why is it hard to buy things that work well?

#209

Post by WWLink »

massysett wrote: post #62
Gigachad wrote: post #26

Earlier quoted context omitted.

As usual its just how much money you put in to it. We spend a lot of money making sure building foundations and silicon manufacturing works because failing is expensive and dangerous. I don't want to pay double/triple price for a toaster to slightly reduce its risk of failing because I'm happy to accept that on average it lasts a long time but there is some chance it fails sooner. If I'm in charge of buying a $100M b…

There’s a lot of stuff that works remarkably well even though it’s cheap. I just came from a supermarket. It’s filled with items from around the world, of which most are very inexpensive. The consistent quality of these products is astounding—a bag of potato chips or a box of crackers tastes exactly the same, anywhere in the country where I buy it, year-round. A can of Coca-Cola tastes exactly the same even though th…

> There’s a lot of stuff that works remarkably well even though it’s cheap.

Even light switches are pretty cheap. You can get a basic single light switch for around $2. Sure there's decora switches, dimmer switches, and all kinds of other great things for $50+ but the basic $2 ones will still last decades.

Re: Why is it hard to buy things that work well?

#210

Post by WWLink »

fouc wrote: post #87
______-_-______ wrote: post #80

Earlier quoted context omitted.

In other words, 90% of everything is crap, both then and now. And thanks to Lindy's Law, you're usually better off buying something old than something new. But that's not how most people think :( https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lindy_effect

> Thus, the Lindy effect proposes the longer a period something has survived to exist or be used in the present, it is also likely to have a longer remaining life expectancy. Makes sense! I was also thinking there's a related rule - something worth buying used has proven itself to not be crap.

That's also seen as survival bias!
Post reply on HN