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

The Shut-In Economy

medium.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

311–320 of 348 posts

Re: The Shut-In Economy

#311

Post by wutbrodo »

eigenvector wrote: post #294
wutbrodo wrote: post #184

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> In 2015, there is less need than ever for us to all live in the same few places. That's an interesting perspective. I've heard (and believe) the exact opposite. In 2015, there's no need to incur the (well-studied) economic, environmental, and cultural costs of low population density. Not to mention it's kind of bizarre to assume that it's clearly _better_ that having a population of only 2,000 people from which to…

Small towns aren't unequivocally better, but they are better for some people, such as people like the GP who might prefer not to be constantly thrust into large groups of unfamiliar people. For a long time they weren't really an option unless you wanted to do menial work you whole life. I'm merely pointing out that they are once again an option, if the small town lifestyle is what you prefer.

I guess I misinterpreted your comment. The last sentence sounded like you were making the claim that small towns' natural advantages are no longer necessarily balanced out by their economic cost (due to remote work), and thus implying that small towns are inherently better socially than big cities. I see now that an alternative interpretation (evidently the one you meant) is that you were saying that small towns' social advantages _for GP_ are no longer necessarily balanced out by an economic cost.

Re: The Shut-In Economy

#312

Post by wutbrodo »

agentultra wrote: post #257
JohnBooty wrote: post #91

I don't feel like ordering things online makes me a shut-in at all - just the opposite. I work a lot, and by spending less time on the drudgery of brick-and-mortar shopping, I have more time to spend on the things that matter to me. Including socializing. Yeah, maybe I leave the house less, but are those trips to the store really "quality time?" Making a run to Wal-Mart or the supermarket to buy toilet paper is time…

One thing I've noticed is the missing "friendly strangers" in my life -- the people you recognize by being visible in your community at all of the places people regularly frequent (or used to at least). Seeing the same people again and even just recognizing they are there reinforces a sense of place for me. I moved out of the big city to a smaller one and was instantly fascinated by people who would say, "Hi," as I p…

> The culture of the city I just came from was different. People would assume you wanted something if you opened your mouth or looked at anything but the ground a few meters in front of you. For more than a decade I lived in a place where people weren't nice to you unless they were selling something.

Honestly, I've heard this a lot, but I moved from a suburby area to one of the densest cities in the country and IME, people who feel this way are people who haven't really tried saying hello. I make eye contact with strangers and say hello pretty often, and I never really get anything but smiles and friendly replies in response. The same thing applies to chatting to people when waiting in line or whatever, etc. This isn't just a bubble thing, because I live in a pretty grubby area but also socialize in a lot of swankier areas, and I've found it to be pretty universally true.

TL;DR: You get out of a community what you put into it.

Re: The Shut-In Economy

#313

Post by fragmede »

pokoleo wrote: post #99
JohnBooty wrote: post #91

I don't feel like ordering things online makes me a shut-in at all - just the opposite. I work a lot, and by spending less time on the drudgery of brick-and-mortar shopping, I have more time to spend on the things that matter to me. Including socializing. Yeah, maybe I leave the house less, but are those trips to the store really "quality time?" Making a run to Wal-Mart or the supermarket to buy toilet paper is time…

> service that sends you 3 ready-to-prepare meals (for two or four people) per week Which service?

plated, blue apron, forage, hello fresh, peach dish, green blender... it is a cool idea but there's quite a bit of competition.

Re: The Shut-In Economy

#314

Post by michaelchisari »

wutbrodo wrote: post #310
michaelchisari wrote: post #290

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The only gap between "knowing" and "not knowing" is perhaps three seconds of Googling Have you ever worked tech support and had to help a lawyer or doctor set up their router? It's not about mental deficiency.

That example is not relevant in the slightest. Setting up a router quite clearly requires prior knowledge, even if that knowledge is something implicit like "familiarity with navigating Web UIs" or "general familiarity with basic networking concepts". Neither of those are applicable to doing laundry. There's literally no knowledge required other than "clothes and detergent go into machine". Hell, you don't even have…

So nobody has ever shrunk clothes before? Or ruined whites? Or mixed ammonia and bleach to clean a floor?

Re: The Shut-In Economy

#315

Post by gallifreyan »

hoboon wrote: post #24

This is how I feel. I don't watch TV for hours like I did as a child. What I do now is worse; stay in doors programming, browsing the web aimlessly, or staring at the ceiling. I don't blame my internet lifestyle for this really, but I literally don't know what else to do and the internet is so accommodating to me being a shut-in. I know I'm wasting my life but I don't know how to stop. San Francisco is a beautiful ci…

Hi Hoboon. I'm the editor of the story the OP put up here. Would you mind dropping me a line? bobbie at medium dot com

Re: The Shut-In Economy

#316

Post by tsotha »

michaelchisari wrote: post #314
wutbrodo wrote: post #310

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That example is not relevant in the slightest. Setting up a router quite clearly requires prior knowledge, even if that knowledge is something implicit like "familiarity with navigating Web UIs" or "general familiarity with basic networking concepts". Neither of those are applicable to doing laundry. There's literally no knowledge required other than "clothes and detergent go into machine". Hell, you don't even have…

So nobody has ever shrunk clothes before? Or ruined whites? Or mixed ammonia and bleach to clean a floor?

So you screw up once and you learn. Why do you have to learn now, when your labor is in demand, rather than later (accepting OP premise) when the value of your labor has been arbitraged away?

Re: The Shut-In Economy

#317

Post by gress »

tedks wrote: post #293
gress wrote: post #145

Earlier quoted context omitted.

All this is not relevant to the fact that there is no evidence for depression being caused by a chemical imbalance.

Yes, the point of my post was not to argue for the serotonin hypothesis of depression. If you think that, might I suggest that you missed my point, and you should perhaps reread with an eye towards absorbing novel information and viewpoints rather than trying to classify literally everything as either on a FOR or AGAINST side in a binary argument?

You were arguing that the absence of a blood test doesn't necessarily undermine chemical imbalance theories because of the complexity of the systems involved.

Re: The Shut-In Economy

#318

Post by barbs »

onion2k wrote: post #214
JohnBooty wrote: post #91

I don't feel like ordering things online makes me a shut-in at all - just the opposite. I work a lot, and by spending less time on the drudgery of brick-and-mortar shopping, I have more time to spend on the things that matter to me. Including socializing. Yeah, maybe I leave the house less, but are those trips to the store really "quality time?" Making a run to Wal-Mart or the supermarket to buy toilet paper is time…

If you use the extra time to do those quality things like playing with your dog or reading then you're benefiting from the on-demand economy. You've figured out how to make it work for you. That's great. But... Lots of other people don't use that time well. They 'save' lots of time by having things brought to them, and spend that time watching TV or browsing the net despite not really enjoying those things. They're e…

> They 'save' lots of time by having things brought to them, and spend that time watching TV or browsing the net despite not really enjoying those things. They're exchanging money for time to do passive activities they don't like and don't make them feel good.

I would agree with you here - often I have to push myself to do something more worthwhile with my spare time. Why do we do these "passive activities"? Is it because it requires little effort, despite little reward? Is it a mild form of addiction? It almost seems like procrastination, except it happens during dedicated spare time.

Re: The Shut-In Economy

#319

Post by WalterSear »

smackfu wrote: post #285
WalterSear wrote: post #242

Earlier quoted context omitted.

For me, that's barely cheaper than eating out, if at all. The portions are always big enough for two people - unhealthily so.

They always keep right around 700 calories, which is pretty healthy for a dinner.

That's not the point. It means they are delivering the same amount of food (2 X half a portion), for pretty much the same price, minus the enjoyment of eating out. And apparently, they take about as much to make as a regular meal from the store.

EDIT: I think we are talking at cross purposes - I meant restaurant meals are usually plenty for two people.

Re: The Shut-In Economy

#320

Post by mrec »

lmm wrote: post #262
mrec wrote: post #215

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Your environment is what you make of it. Alternatively, maybe different people genuinely prefer different environments. You appear to be an extreme extrovert, so it's no great surprise that you enjoy living in a metropolis. Other people aren't, and don't.

I think that's backwards from the usual definition of "extrovert". I don't like making small-talk with relative strangers, whether that's the store clerk, someone waiting for the same train, or what have you. So I love living in a big city.

Yes and no. I absolutely get where you're coming from; I'm an extreme introvert living in London, and the anonymity is about the only thing that makes it bearable. The flip side here, and in many (but not all) metropoles, is the near-impossibility of finding quiet, either at work (expensive commercial property pushing employers toward open-plan bedlam hell) or at home (expensive residential property pushing people into tiny thin-walled apartments).

I think the small-talk-with-everyone-you-meet thing is a characteristic of very small towns and villages. I've lived in medium-sized places that didn't have it. The introvert ideal of a blissful hermitage miles from anywhere is probably impractical, for many reasons, but I still have some faint hope of finding a liveable middle ground someday.

Post reply on HN