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

Generation Junk

walterkirn.substack.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

451–460 of 471 posts

Re: Generation Junk

#451

Post by z3ncyberpunk »

CobaltFire wrote: post #197
LiquidPolymer wrote: post #106

We have friends that just laid out $3000 for a new washer drier set and washer is already leaking from the front door. Pursuing warranty repair has been a major hassle. My wife and I use a washer and drier set from the late 90's that are nothing to look at but work really well. They appear to be designed with service in mind and changing components is usually extremely easy - something I have done infrequently. These…

There are brands built to super high standards, but no-one wants to pay for them or deal with their compromises. We have been buying Miele appliances, and have nothing but excellent experiences. They aren't cheap, but the general opinion I've seen online is that they are one of the few brands that build quality modern appliances. My experiences would tend to back that up. Specific to the Miele washer and dryer, we ha…

Yes because for the same "quality" today you're likely to have to pay double the historic equivalent due to corporate profiteering. It's a rigged game and people just lap it up and simp for brands like they aren't parasites. It's pretty disgusting.

Re: Generation Junk

#452

Post by YouWhy »

MichaelZuo wrote: post #422
dehrmann wrote: post #421

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's more than just QC. When you make 3M cars per year, you get a lot of data points about what fails, and you you feed that back into new designs. You also nail manufacturing tolerances. When you make 4,000 (and a lot of those won't see the same mileage as a Honda), there aren't as many opportunities to find these issues. Or another way: you an QC a bolt to death, but that doesn't tell you if it's undersized for the…

Yes it does when there are several stages of prototypes and engineering builds before the actual production vehicle is shipped to customers... and the hundreds of other mechanisms and systems that major automakers use nowadays. I mentioned QC because it's the first screening for arriving parts, not the only thing that occurs. Do you not know how car manufacturing works? Anyways you don't have to take the quality of R…

Design iteration is typically a long tail phenomenon - new issues keep coming up as the system (car) faces new scenarios.

Even a high-resource prototyping program can only go so far with scenarios like - wear and tear/part fatigue, adverse environmental conditions, local peculiarities (e.g. regulatory requirements for uncommon configurations), unintended but common maintenance mistakes etc.

For example, a Fiat car my family owned suffered a cascade drivetrain failure after about 9 years on the road. I don't think a prototyping program could have captured that ahead of time.

The fact that the showroom RR parts look fine only indicates that the parts are ok immediately after manufacturing; it does not promise they'll work fine after several years even if treated will.

Re: Generation Junk

#454

Post by 8n4vidtmkvmk »

coldtea wrote: post #252
idontwantthis wrote: post #240

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Yeah this article would be a lot more interesting if there were a conspiracy to buy up all of the indestructible appliances made more than x decades ago. If they really were that much better then more of them would be around today.

Not really, since most consumers just go for whatever has the more "features" and is marketed at them.

I don't like this trend either. I was trying to buy an electric toothbrush the other month and there were so many models with different features. I'm like wtf it's a toothbrush, can it brush my teeth? Yes? Give me that one. I don't need you to tell me when to replace the brush or how long to brush for or sing me a song.

Re: Generation Junk

#455

Post by 8n4vidtmkvmk »

Klathmon wrote: post #343
jesterson wrote: post #341

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Modern cars are much, much more reliable and durable than ones built at any time in the past May I know the timeframe and your experience on which you base the conclusion? Been driving for last 35 years. Every newer car is crappier in every possible way - comfort, speed, durability, quality, reliability. It's not some subjective observations - some 40-50 years ago automakers were accomodating customers, now they ac…

> limitations imposed by governments to make it "safer". You have scare quotes there for some reason, but by pretty much all accounts cars now are so much safer than before. Like to an insane amount, over a 50% reduction in chance of fatality since the 70s/80s. > we have weak motors which roar like boeing at 5k rpm but still doesn't help to move car forward. And again it's working. Efficiency has increased even more…

Fuel economy at the expense of letting me accelerate it seems. I have to turn on sport mode to safely merge onto the highway.

Re: Generation Junk

#456

Post by neoromantique »

empyrrhicist wrote: post #374
ghusto wrote: post #290

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That, is an excellent point. However, the very reason I buy in them in the first place is that they proved themselves to me _at the time_. Believe it or not, what I'm saying is I never had a bad experience with cars from the 90s, in the 90s.

The difference in body rust in winter climates with road salt is incredible, IME. Many cars from the 90s and early 2000s just absolutely fell apart.

I live in a place with real winters and road salt and I can assure you that modern cars are plenty corroded by 5 year mark if they weren't treated additionally post manufacturing for it.

Re: Generation Junk

#457

Post by jesterson »

8n4vidtmkvmk wrote: post #455
Klathmon wrote: post #343

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> limitations imposed by governments to make it "safer". You have scare quotes there for some reason, but by pretty much all accounts cars now are so much safer than before. Like to an insane amount, over a 50% reduction in chance of fatality since the 70s/80s. > we have weak motors which roar like boeing at 5k rpm but still doesn't help to move car forward. And again it's working. Efficiency has increased even more…

Fuel economy at the expense of letting me accelerate it seems. I have to turn on sport mode to safely merge onto the highway.

Exactly. There is no fuel economy since you still have to pump it to 5-6k rpm and no safety as well since it may cost you life when you have not enough power during overtake.

Sport mode on some cars is so lousy implemented (some SEA market toyota for example) that it's not even a solution.

Re: Generation Junk

#458

Post by truculent »

cs702 wrote: post #425
truculent wrote: post #412

Earlier quoted context omitted.

What’s the implication for moving the equilibrium point? State action? Collective action?

Depends on the market and the product. The best way, in my view, is through product innovation by ambitious entrepreneurs who come up with a better solution. Instead of trying to making the equivalent of a faster horse carriage at cheaper cost, they figure out how to make the equivalent of an automobile, rendering horse carriages obsolete.

This is a bit if a sidestep - how do you increase the rate of product innovation?

Re: Generation Junk

#459

Post by piuantiderp »

klipklop wrote: post #42

I wonder if this is the symptom of ever eroding purchasing power the average western person is experiencing. Everyone is looking to stretch their income further and are willing to buy ever cheaper, but flimsy goods. Really the only thing that will fix it is stronger warranty law, this will make things more expensive, but it will massively cut down on landfill fodder. A refrigerator that can’t last 20 years is terribl…

It just boils down to energy/capita. While there have been some efficiency gains on the consumer usage side, the big cuts in quality come from the production side. Our lifestyles need to worsen to stop climate warming...

Re: Generation Junk

#460

Post by citizenpaul »

jefftk wrote: post #65
citizenpaul wrote: post #55

A huge number of the things most people buy weekly are made on machines not even made last century. Your grains, rice, cereals beans were probably made on a machine from the 1800's. Yep all the big brands. My brother works at a co that makes custom repair parts for these machines he sees them all the time. They often have to fly people out to the factory to do measurements and calibrations because no documentation ex…

> Your grains, rice, cereals beans were probably made on a machine from the 1800's. Yep all the big brands. I don't see how that could work: the population is far larger than it was then, so our consumption of those must be up a lot. How could a stock of machines that was suitable then could be producing even half the volume consumed now?

I'm not an expert in this area so IDK. I could ask my brother if he knows if you really want?

I imagine one of the differences is that they run 24x7x365 without any downtime unless it breaks (they never do maintenance only break/fix). These machines were super overbuilt so maybe they were never used at peak capacity back then either? Maybe there were improvements over the years? I assume the getting raw materials to the factory is much more efficient now days allowing more production then they used to be able to have?

Look how many things ran out during the pandemic. Maybe we are over capacity at many of these places already? How often do any of us head out to the middle of nowhere to check the stock levels of product regularly?

Post reply on HN