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

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

bloomberg.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

491–500 of 566 posts

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

#491

Post by Kalium »

SeanBoocock wrote: post #479
angersock wrote: post #459

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> I guess is the goal for everyone to join in some sort of majoritarian social contract? Being a lgbt person growing up I didn't interact in my local small community at all, because there was a damn good chance the local community would band together and mob me for being what I am. Alternately, by removing yourself from your community you failed to give them examples that would've broadened their horizons. Like, this…

Are you suggesting that a closeted person has any sort of obligation to come out to (potential) bigots so that said bigots can attain a more enlightened worldview? It is not incumbent on marginalized people to teach their oppressors the errors in their ways, often at great risk to themselves.

I agree with your point wholeheartedly and completely. You are fully correct in every possible way, in every detail.

With that said, a more charitable reading might be that the person was noting the power of representation and role models to inspire.

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

#492

Post by tjr225 »

SeanBoocock wrote: post #479
angersock wrote: post #459

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> I guess is the goal for everyone to join in some sort of majoritarian social contract? Being a lgbt person growing up I didn't interact in my local small community at all, because there was a damn good chance the local community would band together and mob me for being what I am. Alternately, by removing yourself from your community you failed to give them examples that would've broadened their horizons. Like, this…

Are you suggesting that a closeted person has any sort of obligation to come out to (potential) bigots so that said bigots can attain a more enlightened worldview? It is not incumbent on marginalized people to teach their oppressors the errors in their ways, often at great risk to themselves.

I think that's exactly what they're suggesting and it's totally absurd.

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

#493

Post by Kalium »

LMYahooTFY wrote: post #490
Kalium wrote: post #331

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Personally, I view this as a distinct upgrade. Instead of being coerced into lots of interaction with people I may have nothing in common with except vague geographical proximity, I have the option of interacting with people who actually share my interests or concerns or hobbies. To me, this isn't isolated loners. It's the first real community I've ever known. The first one I've ever actually felt like I was a part o…

I think you're applying the words "tyranny" and "coercion" very sloppily here, and seem rather dismissive of community as it's existed prior to "real community". I don't see anything you've stated as mutually exclusive to the previous comment. I point out what I perceive as dismissive because I think there are important aspects of human character that 'tyrannical' circumstances help to shape, enabling us to learn pat…

Thank you! You're very right. I've not communicated well. Please allow me to clarify.

I should rephrase: this is the first experience I've had of what is commonly described as "community". I hope that clarifies matters. I am not describing a community encountered as an artifact. I am describing the experience of being a member of a community. I hope this helps! Do let me know if I can help clarify more.

The comment to which I was responding took a very narrow view of what defines a community. The definition offered is one that would have been obvious to an illiterate serf a thousand years ago - people nearby they have no choice but to cooperate with for basic survival. For the most part, you had two choices: membership or death. And membership meant conforming.

Some might consider such a choice coercive. Such a person might even consider the circumstances that require that choice tyrannical.

I have offered a much more expansive one, where a person can be a member of multiple communities non-exclusively in a way that allows them to find communities that suit them. This formulation, unfortunately, can be seen as dismissive of the value of the communities of the past.

This is a very understandable viewpoint. After all, the expansive definition would seem to do away with the basic tenants of the narrow one. Yet, it's perhaps possible that this view could become even more correct than it already is! There's absolutely value in what even the narrowest of definitions would consider a community. They teach the value of belonging, of collaboration, and of many hands making light work. It just might be worth considering that there could be other lessons to be learned in this world that might not be fully captured there.

After all, humans are not TCP/IP. Capital-T Truth is not always easy to come by. There are still people in this world who consider (for example) failing to say the right ritual words at the right ritual time every day to be a grievous error in need of correction.

In a world where the obvious truths of the past are today's errors to be progressed beyond, we are presented with the wonderful opportunity to let endless forms of community bloom most beautiful. That we might learn from this glorious array what can be progressed beyond and how.

Though I understand if some would prefer not to.

Thank you very much, from the bottom of my heart, for the opportunity to engage.

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

#494

Post by lovich »

pathseeker wrote: post #353
lovich wrote: post #207

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If the local can company had an option for me to call one of their cans and i could track it to my door, I probably never would have used Uber. There's some value in being an app you can use in any city, but the number of people who are jet setting around the world _and_ need a cab is probably quite low

>If the local can company had an option for me to call one of their cans and i could track it to my door, I probably never would have used Uber. Yep, and for you to report them when they scam you on rides and lie about broken credit card machines. But alas, most cab companies don't have this so you turn to the apps that do provide it.

Yes, I will put it out there that Uber/Lyft/fasten/local Uber clone all provided an actual benefit since you knew up front what the cost is.

That, however, does not mean that their network affects are worth their externalities as any individual company could provide services in a city where you knew the price up front, but did not rely on their global network effects

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

#495

Post by User23 »

elicash wrote: post #259
User23 wrote: post #178

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Renters have less skin in the game than owners, and this drives a number of long term sub-optimal decisions.

Sub-optimal decisions FOR WHO? Clearly not sub-optimal decisions for the renters or they wouldn't favor the different policy.

For the community as a whole.

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

#496

Post by jamiek88 »

supernovae wrote: post #405
wott wrote: post #350

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> It seems we're substituting "ownership" with control. But you do not control anything any more with those companies. They can revoke your accesses, they can ban you from using their services for any reason, they can change the terms of services, the offers, the rates, whenever they wish. Unlike you, I would say you lost the control which came implicitly with ownership, and did not regain another form of control. At…

Reductio ad absurdum... Historically everything from the ownership society has died - everything. Do you still buy betamax players? lazerdisc players? minidisc or walkmans? no... When the hell have you ever been banned from netflix? If the price goes up, i'll just cancel the service. I don't "collect" netflix shows or have any desire to do anything to feel complete so a change of terms of service, rates, offers or ev…

Hey can you tell me what that documentary service you used was? Sounds like exactly what I’ve been looking for.

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

#497

Post by Kalium »

_bxg1 wrote: post #326
qubex wrote: post #307

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I might add that Silicon Valley et al has not simply cleverly redefined the meaning of ’sharing’ to cover their rental practices, but even the meaning of community has been totally warped out of shape. A community used to be a group of geographically proximate people whose collective survival depended on getting over their sometimes conflicting mutual interests and opinions in order to survive; now we use the term ’c…

I disagree that community requires geographical proximity, but I definitely agree that it's on the list of positive terms co-opted by internet companies to disguise their profit-driven motives. Community requires compassion and shared interest; these days it's applied to any and every kind of human connection, with no regard to whether that connection is beneficial or even wanted.

I would even go so far as to say that "community" has come to mean "group of people who have some common characteristic". No actual interaction or bonds between any of them is required. The word loses meaning as the actual human connections involved are removed.

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

#498

Post by burfog »

rabboRubble wrote: post #289
captainarab wrote: post #217

Earlier quoted context omitted.

How do you keep breaking so many refrigerator shelves..? I've never broken one in my entire life..

Heat. If the shelf is glass, and the glass is not resistant against wide temperature variations, the glass weakens and eventually will shatter.

I doubt it. I open the door of course, but I don't put hot things into the fridge.

My shelves are generally packed with large jugs. For example, on a main shelf I might have 4 gallons of milk and a half dozen half-gallon containers of juice and then more stuff to fill out the remaining space. Door shelves are similarly packed, with the ones in the Samsung being about 12x8 inches and thus big enough for gallons of milk.

The fridge is constantly used by kids. It needs to be mostly restocked every other day.

Glass shattered in one of the $400 fridges. The other $400 fridge is wire. Glass shelves in the Samsung would break around the edge, leaving me with an intact sheet of glass and some broken plastic. Door shelves are always plastic. Samsung snapped white and clear plastic together to make the shelves, with a fragile zig-zag at the joint. I got to wrapping the shelves with string-embedded packing tape before installing them, which increased the typical life from weeks to months.

Give me forged metal grates please, or at least something like rustproof storm drain covers.

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

#499

Post by [deleted] »

supernovae wrote: post #311
ryandrake wrote: post #241

I’m surprised at the criticism here and I think the critics are missing the author’s point. He’s not saying, “buy more stuff you don’t need” or even, “possess more stuff.” He’s saying, “you ought to own the stuff you possess.” Which I didn’t think was a controversial opinion but I guess I stand corrected. I might be an outlier. I make a deliberate effort to own instead of rent. My commute is enormous because I moved…

What is the value of "owning" something? I've owned VHS's, they're worthless I've owned houses - that I had to short sell I've owned DVD's - they're worthless I've owned Books - they're worthless What is the value of owning over just paying to enjoy access? I like spotify because i can sync music to my phone to play offline - but "owning" all this music is worthless... I had a HUGE cd collection growing up but they w…

[deleted]

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

#500

Post by kennyadam »

SeanBoocock wrote: post #479
angersock wrote: post #459

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> I guess is the goal for everyone to join in some sort of majoritarian social contract? Being a lgbt person growing up I didn't interact in my local small community at all, because there was a damn good chance the local community would band together and mob me for being what I am. Alternately, by removing yourself from your community you failed to give them examples that would've broadened their horizons. Like, this…

Are you suggesting that a closeted person has any sort of obligation to come out to (potential) bigots so that said bigots can attain a more enlightened worldview? It is not incumbent on marginalized people to teach their oppressors the errors in their ways, often at great risk to themselves.

Who is it that teaches the oppressors the error of their ways? I'd suggest it is actually the marginalized people. Civil rights movement is a great example.
Post reply on HN