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

Buy well, buy once

fellow.ventures

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

351–360 of 392 posts

Re: Buy well, buy once

#351

Post by ericpauley »

jet_32951 wrote: post #345
KronisLV wrote: post #195

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Every single one of these items is cheap enough to buy in bulk whenever I want them. I apply something like this to most of my purchases. If I am buying a new phone or some computer hardware, I want to be able to fit another replacement for what I'm about to buy into whatever my budget is. The same goes for clothes, tools for the garden like a tiller or a chainsaw or whatever. And you know what? It's a decent appro…

In the US the calculus for cheap tools is "cheap Chinese chainsaw, $120; ER (emergency room) visit, $3750."

Agreed. I often lean towards getting cheaper products if they’ll do, but that logic has a hard stop when something is safety-critical.

Re: Buy well, buy once

#352

Post by gnicholas »

johnchristopher wrote: post #334
gnicholas wrote: post #225

Earlier quoted context omitted.

How do those interact with the MagSafe charging are on the back of the iPhone?

No idea, I haven't had an iPhone in ages. They have magsafe versions though https://www.popsockets.com/en-us/more/magsafe so I suppose it's compatible ?

Ah, thanks for the link. I think this means they can occupy the MagSafe slot, but if you want to charge via MagSafe then you have to remove them and reattach after.

Re: Buy well, buy once

#353

Post by ianburrell »

throwaway74513 wrote: post #91
nicbou wrote: post #64

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I used to be interested in minimalism, but I realised that they just obsess over objects in a different way. I wanted to save money, avoid maintenance and reduce my mental load. I found people who keep spreadsheets of their stuff and debate whether it's okay to own tools or multiple coffee cups.

> I used to be interested in minimalism, but I realised that they just obsess over objects in a different way. This is really interesting, particularly since you use the word “obsess”. I meet all of the criteria for OCPD (obsessive compulsive personality disorder — NOT the same thing as OCD), except for “unwilling to throw out broken or worthless objects, even if they have no sentimental value”. In fact, I’m quite th…

Please talk to a doctor. Looking at the Merck manual, the criteria are 4 or more symptoms. If you have 7 of 8 symptoms, then you may have OCPD.

Re: Buy well, buy once

#354

Post by xyzelement »

tnel77 wrote: post #344
xyzelement wrote: post #74

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I agree with you but I don't think it's a financial thing but a psychological/maturity thing. People have kids at all income levels. For every one who claims they can't afford kids - someone is raising a family on that same income.

That’s true. I meant more so for those that purposeful have children. My brother had two children that were definitely unplanned.

That's what I am referring to as well. Plenty of people at income X intentionally have children while plenty of people at 5X lament not being able to afford them. I think this is true for every X.

I suspect income has a negative correlation with the number of children in general, if anything.

Re: Buy well, buy once

#355

Post by helmholtz »

nerdchum wrote: post #250
lumb63 wrote: post #244

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This isn’t a totally fair comparison. When people buy shoes, their criteria isn’t normally as low as “covers my feet”. They have a specific style they want, a specific material, and will shop amongst shoes that fit that description. Crocs and dress shoes are not interchangeable to a lot of people. A better comparison is to look at, for instance, Johnston and Murphy vs. Alden. Then you get a more fair comparison. For…

Agree. Theres alot of factors involved in buying anything. So we need to stop acting like we have great wisdom for "Paying more for quality" when in reality status and fashion had as much to do with the purchase as well.

No, I think we need to stop contriving obviously skewed examples like Aldens vs Crocs. Boots vs shitty holey rubber sandals isn't a good comparison.

Maybe compare backpack, or suits, or something along those lines.

Re: Buy well, buy once

#356

Post by KronisLV »

jet_32951 wrote: post #345
KronisLV wrote: post #195

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Every single one of these items is cheap enough to buy in bulk whenever I want them. I apply something like this to most of my purchases. If I am buying a new phone or some computer hardware, I want to be able to fit another replacement for what I'm about to buy into whatever my budget is. The same goes for clothes, tools for the garden like a tiller or a chainsaw or whatever. And you know what? It's a decent appro…

In the US the calculus for cheap tools is "cheap Chinese chainsaw, $120; ER (emergency room) visit, $3750."

> In the US the calculus for cheap tools is "cheap Chinese chainsaw, $120; ER (emergency room) visit, $3750."

The healthcare costs are indeed unfortunate, but personally I can't think of many things that would be so dangerous about chainsaws.

Kickback will happen with every saw, the chain brake should be tested before every run anyways. A 50cc single cylinder engine doesn't feel like it'd be too dangerous to be around, especially with the rest of the chainsaw body around it. Maybe the chain wouldn't be too good and people would tension it too much, or perhaps it could come apart or something. Even then, PPE that you're wearing would generally make you safer. Realistically, at most it won't last you a decade and signs of wear will become apparent a bit earlier.

Regardless, I get your point and thank you for making it!

Re: Buy well, buy once

#357

Post by freggeln »

comfypotato wrote: post #329
nerdchum wrote: post #214

I think a lot of times this philosophy is just rich people justifying paying a lot for high status items. a pair of Crocs is 50 bucks and that's one of the highest quality pairs of shoes you'll buy for the price. you could buy 10 pairs of Crocs for a $500 pair of Alden's so even if the crocs only lasted a year, it would take a decade to recoup the investment on the Alden's. but the crocs don't have the same status th…

Crocs are not utilitarian (no structure or support for physical activity) and they aren’t appropriate in the wider spectrum a nice pair of shoes are. I settled on some classic Vans after a deep internet dive signaled that they’re the most popular among homeless people for being durable and comfortable without being too expensive. They look fine, and I have a lot of freedom regarding when to replace them. I’m very hap…

Would you mind sharing some resources from your deep internet dive (if you still have them at hand) or maybe even just sharing the Vans model? Thanks.

Re: Buy well, buy once

#358

Post by comfypotato »

freggeln wrote: post #357
comfypotato wrote: post #329

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Crocs are not utilitarian (no structure or support for physical activity) and they aren’t appropriate in the wider spectrum a nice pair of shoes are. I settled on some classic Vans after a deep internet dive signaled that they’re the most popular among homeless people for being durable and comfortable without being too expensive. They look fine, and I have a lot of freedom regarding when to replace them. I’m very hap…

Would you mind sharing some resources from your deep internet dive (if you still have them at hand) or maybe even just sharing the Vans model? Thanks.

The dive was mostly archived Reddit threads.

https://www.vans.com/en-us/shoes-c00081/sk8-hi-canvas-shoe-p...

Re: Buy well, buy once

#359

Post by fuzzfactor »

In many ways you can't really be a consumer and a producer at the same time, you're mostly more of one than the other.

It's so difficult to toe the line without leaning more one way than the other.

For me I had the biggest abundance and greatest variety of elecronic components to perform repairs and hobbyist work when I had stockpiled kilos of discared circuit boards back when they were almost all still through-hole design.

One man gathers what another man spills.

Re: Buy well, buy once

#360

Post by nerdchum »

klyrs wrote: post #348
LargeDiggerNick wrote: post #347

Earlier quoted context omitted.

"Exceptionally" I think you might be thinking its more prophetic than it actually is.

It's more prophetic than the overwhelming majority of futuristicistic movies. Exceptionally does not equal extremely.

you should write a blog post or something about it. I don't find it very prophetic but would like to hear other people's opinions.
Post reply on HN