Americans Own Less Stuff, and That’s Reason to Be Nervous • Hacker News Board

Re: Americans Own Less Stuff, and That’s Reason to Be Nervous

#221

Post by ryandrake » Tue, Aug 14, 2018, 6:00 PM UTC

nepeckman wrote: post #171

paultopia wrote: post #137

The classical notion that property is a kind of independence, which this article implicitly draws on, has always felt wrong to me. Rather, property feels to me like vulnerability. When you own things, they can be stolen, they can be destroyed by extreme weather (a real consideration living in the Midwest---for folks in CA, think of the fires), they can randomly stop working, they can be devalued by market crashes. If…

The other side of this is when you rent, you're beholden to the company you're renting from. If the car-as-a-service company says "Car service is now $10 more per month" you have to pay that. If the company says "We are no longer offering $your_favorite_car as a renting option", you no longer have access to your preferred vehicle. Given the overhead involved in setting up a car-as-a-service company, I'm willing to be…

Also, if the car service says, “Our opaque machine learning algorithm determined that you violated our terms of service. We cannot tell me ou how, and your account is closed. You cannot appeal and this conversation is over.” Well you’re out of luck. Hopefully it’s not the only car-as-a-service company out there.

Re: Americans Own Less Stuff, and That’s Reason to Be Nervous

#222

Post by glitchc » Tue, Aug 14, 2018, 6:02 PM UTC

TaylorAlexander wrote: post #90

glitchc wrote: post #34

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The Machine doesn't fix the problem. Just some problems off the top of my head: 1) Some groups will just use the resources of the Machine, while others will work on improving The Machine. Over time, Machines in some areas will be vastly more capable than other areas. This will create haves and have-nots, urge migration and give rise to a system very similar to the current worlds (first-, second-, third-). 2) In your…

Nothing can “fix the problem”, but I propose that putting the essential machinery of production in to common ownership can help. In the stories I write, no one can force someone else to “pony up” for upgrades, and everything is open source. Much of my writing is meant to be a thought experiment. I think it may be an improvement if groups of people support one another voluntarily, and share in common ownership of crit…

The Machine will result in different kinds of inequality, possibly worse over the long run.

What I was trying to demonstrate is that classes exist because humans want them to exist. Technology cannot solve a behaviour problem. Through evolution, we learn that a certain percentage of selfish actors in a large pool of altruistic actors is long-term stable, which blew me away the first time I read about it.

Finally, have you read Cory Doctorow's "Walkaway"? If not, suggested reading.

Re: Americans Own Less Stuff, and That’s Reason to Be Nervous

#223

Post by _louisr_ » Tue, Aug 14, 2018, 6:03 PM UTC

crazygringo wrote: post #167

This is beyond ridiculous. The crux of the article is: > Each of these changes is beneficial, yet I worry that Americans are, slowly but surely, losing their connection to the idea of private ownership. The nation was based on the notion that property ownership gives individuals a stake in the system. It set Americans apart from feudal peasants, taught us how property rights and incentives operate, and was a kind of…

>If we want to be nervous, let's investigate inequality of net worth

And we should find ourselves completely at ease at the end of our investigation, for in every species success is distributed inequitably. Inequality of net worth is a natural law, and human society is no exception. And we need to keep very hard working people motivated to keep working very hard by ensuring them that they will always keep the lions share of their labour's products.

Re: Americans Own Less Stuff, and That’s Reason to Be Nervous

#224

Post by TangoTrotFox » Tue, Aug 14, 2018, 6:04 PM UTC

qiqing wrote: post #205

_bxg1 wrote: post #134

The article identifies some problems but totally misses their actual source. The problem isn't that we own less stuff, it's that the ownership is replaced by a dependency on a handful of corporations which we have no ability to influence or appeal to. The substitution of individual ownership for a communal one in which individuals retain a stake - a real community, or at a larger scale, a democracy - is not inherentl…

Minor quibble, but Airbnb doesn't own the hosts' homes or apartments, and Uber doesn't own the drivers' cars. Renting is an accurate descriptor of Netflix or Kindle (and Google Play movies actually does have "rent" on the label of the button when you want to rent a movie). And I can see what you mean from the perspective of the guest or rider, but not from the perspective of the host or driver.

I'd also agree that Uber/AirBnB do not really fit well in that comment. These are companies that mostly just serve as middlemen. They could theoretically be entirely decentralized enabling people to genuinely connect directly with other people to offer a service. There are even technological solutions towards avoiding bad actors and abuse. For instance mutual facial recognition to ensure people are who they say they are - when you get in a ride, you and the driver both snap a pic of each other, it's verified on both ends, and off you both go. And all metainformation could be publicly stored in a trustless append-only decentralized ledger.

They're just the early middlemen of budding industries that, in an optimistic future, will not even need middlemen.

Re: Americans Own Less Stuff, and That’s Reason to Be Nervous

#225

Post by metalliqaz » Tue, Aug 14, 2018, 6:04 PM UTC

This piece failed to provide the conclusion that was promised in the title.

Re: Americans Own Less Stuff, and That’s Reason to Be Nervous

#226

Post by mywittyname » Tue, Aug 14, 2018, 6:04 PM UTC

CuriousSkeptic wrote: post #206

mywittyname wrote: post #196

A lot of this "stuff" are one-time-use items for the majority of people. I very rarely read a book for a second time nor do I rewatch television shows. When I do, reread a book or rewatch a movie, I usually end up paying for it again because I lost the original or I saw the movie in a theater. The good thing about the digitization of this content is the fact that it will be more likely to be preserved in the long ter…

I fear it will be the complete opposite. Once Netflix decides something is no longer worth streaming to your country there is no way to get at it again. Compared to the possibility of going to a second hand market looking for a dvd-set I’d say the situation will be worse for old movies.

Your fears are completely unfounded. Digital content is so much easier to maintain than older methods of archiving.

The stuff you "buy" from services like Amazon or Steam is going to be around for a very long time. I have digital content that's almost 20 years old now and I still have access to all of it.

Re: Americans Own Less Stuff, and That’s Reason to Be Nervous

#227

Post by paulpauper » Tue, Aug 14, 2018, 6:04 PM UTC

_bxg1 wrote: post #190

crazygringo wrote: post #167

This is beyond ridiculous. The crux of the article is: > Each of these changes is beneficial, yet I worry that Americans are, slowly but surely, losing their connection to the idea of private ownership. The nation was based on the notion that property ownership gives individuals a stake in the system. It set Americans apart from feudal peasants, taught us how property rights and incentives operate, and was a kind of…

> Whether you own music or rent it doesn't give you a stake in the system, nor does owning a car vs using public transport. You're correct, but it does at least give you some agency independent of the system. If you own a DRM-free mp3, you can listen to that song every day for the rest of your life if you want to. Whereas if you just have a Spotify subscription, a record company can decide to pull the track whenever…

but you need electricity, hence a service

Re: Americans Own Less Stuff, and That’s Reason to Be Nervous

#228

Post by EADGBE » Tue, Aug 14, 2018, 6:08 PM UTC

white-flame wrote: post #126

EADGBE wrote: post #50

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Needing to make a fridge open sources screams at me that we really need to be simplifying the operation of a fridge. I think component complication for planned obsolescence is much more of a thing than programming something in X years to kill itself.

Devices that are more efficient tend to be more complex, so that's another tradeoff to consider.

I.E. Internal Combustion Engine vs Electric Motor

Re: Americans Own Less Stuff, and That’s Reason to Be Nervous

#229

Post by ameister14 » Tue, Aug 14, 2018, 6:09 PM UTC

crazygringo wrote: post #167

This is beyond ridiculous. The crux of the article is: > Each of these changes is beneficial, yet I worry that Americans are, slowly but surely, losing their connection to the idea of private ownership. The nation was based on the notion that property ownership gives individuals a stake in the system. It set Americans apart from feudal peasants, taught us how property rights and incentives operate, and was a kind of…

>What gives you a stake is your net worth -- whether in a bank account, investments, land, a house, a company, or several.

I don't think a bank account applies here. If I have a large bank account but no other ties to the community, I have no real skin in the game as it applies to community proceedings. I'll vote however and if I make mistakes I will leave with no losses.

Re: Americans Own Less Stuff, and That’s Reason to Be Nervous

#230

Post by freeone3000 » Tue, Aug 14, 2018, 6:10 PM UTC

owie829 wrote: post #179

EADGBE wrote: post #60

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Sometimes it's just not worth it to own everything. Renting makes a lot of sense for a lot of people. Blockbuster et al were doing this forever ago. If you only cared to watch/use something once; renting it made a lot of sense, and still does.

renting at blockbuster made sense. You could watch a movie unlimited times within a 5 day period for $1.99, versus purchasing the video for $29.99. renting at Amazon Kindle doesn't make sense. You could pay $9.99 to rent a digital version indefinitely (or until Amazon loses the rights to rent), or you can pay $6.50 to buy a paperback version that you have second sale rights to.

Right, but then this paperback takes up physical space. Having boxes and boxes of books is probably really nice for some people, and sounds nice in the abstract, but it's a right pain to move around! I'd rather have PDFs than any residual "second-sale" value.