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

Shaving is an example of how consumer products extract more money

johnwhiles.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

501–510 of 982 posts

Re: Shaving is an example of how consumer products extract more money

#501

Post by switchbak »

karaterobot wrote: post #92

The argument seems to be that people pay more money for products they find more convenient. That's true, but I don't think it's a problem by itself: it's their choice how to spend their money. The problem would arise if the more convenient choice also externalized in some way: if it hurt other people, or the planet, and so on. There is some vague idea that throwing away a cartridge "produces more waste" than throwing…

So there's not much difference between a cartridge and a safety razor. Therefore they're roughly equivalent? Oh and all the total waste of shaving products generally isn't a big deal?

Cartridge and (quality) safety razors don't last the same amount of time. The additional plastic on a cartridge doesn't seem like much, but when you look at the millions of cartridges disposed in a year, it certainly adds up. Compare the packaging and space of 100 safety razors to 100 cartridges and you'll see an enormous difference. This all stacks up to a bigger impact in packing, shipping, etc.

Not to mention the disposable whole-stick razors that some people use (those are terrible).

You also don't provide any data to back up your claim that the total share of waste from all cartridges is trivial. You can't just hand wave this away so easily.

Re: Shaving is an example of how consumer products extract more money

#502

Post by gruez »

mirker wrote: post #200
gruez wrote: post #158

>Other examples of products that seem to exhibit a similar trend, where purported convenience leads to higher prices >Cooking equipment: essentially indestructible Cast Iron skillets transition into teflon pans. The newer pans perform worse, and must be replaced on a shockingly regular basis. They also seem to be poisonous. They have their uses. I wouldn't try frying eggs in a cast iron, for instance (technically you…

For coffee: French press + grinder is straightforward and has little maintenance. Machines have to be descaled.

That's still much more work than a pod machine. With a pod machine you just pop a pod in, put a cup under, press a button, come back 1 minute later and you're done. With your setup you have to pour out beans, wait for it to grind, start boiling water, wait for it to brew, and then clean everything up.

Re: Shaving is an example of how consumer products extract more money

#503

Post by radicalbyte »

neltnerb wrote: post #437
mrob wrote: post #418

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I started shaving a few years ago with a cheap Chinese electric razor. It needs cleaning occasionally but is otherwise trouble free. It shaves close enough to get a good respirator seal, which is close enough for me. It's impossible to injure myself with it, and it's so easy to use that I can literally shave while browsing the web. Unless you are concerned with getting the closest shave possible, electric seems the o…

And it's worth noting that a blade razor usually removes a bit of the top layer of skin, causing irritation, ingrown hairs (on top of avoiding injury from cuts). There are some really fantastic electric razors that are cheap and get close enough that it makes no visual difference, except they don't cut the hairs under the skin so I haven't had an ingrown hair in years and years.

I haven't had ingrowing hairs since I switch to a Merker razor with Feather (Japanese) blades. You have to be very light handed, mind.

Blades cost $0.25 each and I use about 10 a year.

Re: Shaving is an example of how consumer products extract more money

#504

Post by Reason077 »

wyre wrote: post #475
cortesoft wrote: post #321

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The fact that it takes 3 seconds to grab a pod and put it in verse 10 seconds to get the correct amount of powder is not nothing.

How do you live your day where 7 seconds is a a significant amount of time?

It's not a question of where you live, but of how much you value your time.

It's been estimated that Elon Musk's time, for example, is worth around $22,000 per minute. So if he's wasting 7 seconds messing around with his dishwasher, that's a lost opportunity cost of $2566.

Re: Shaving is an example of how consumer products extract more money

#505

Post by pbreit »

mrob wrote: post #418
jader201 wrote: post #398

Why is a thread on electric razors not the top comment on a post about the expense/waste of straight razors? I get that they have some downsides, but if we’re talking about the expense/waste of straight razors, then it would make sense to consider electric razors. I’ve seen so many ads about companies trying to “invent” the most effective, lowest cost straight razor and it still confuses me, given we already have ele…

I started shaving a few years ago with a cheap Chinese electric razor. It needs cleaning occasionally but is otherwise trouble free. It shaves close enough to get a good respirator seal, which is close enough for me. It's impossible to injure myself with it, and it's so easy to use that I can literally shave while browsing the web. Unless you are concerned with getting the closest shave possible, electric seems the o…

May I ask which one? Flat across or the floating heads? Amazon is mostly the more expensive name brands.

Re: Shaving is an example of how consumer products extract more money

#507

Post by bluejekyll »

jader201 wrote: post #455
rhacker wrote: post #447

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I think it's preference. I started out using electric when I first started shaving when I was like 16 or something. As soon as I tried actual razors I couldn't go back. Been like 26 years now.

I guess it’s hard to imagine the upsides of straight razors justifying the (apparent) downsides. I mean, other than a somewhat closer shave, it seems like everything else about them is worse (expense, waste, time/effort, mess, cuts/removing skin, ingrown hairs).

It’s a little pedantic, but what you’re calling “straight razor”, you probably mean “disposable razor” or “cartridge razor”. There is also “safety razor” which has replaceable blade, shown in the article. The “straight razor” looks like a long foldable knife.

Re: Shaving is an example of how consumer products extract more money

#508

Post by kwhitefoot »

moneywoes wrote: post #490
mrob wrote: post #418

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I started shaving a few years ago with a cheap Chinese electric razor. It needs cleaning occasionally but is otherwise trouble free. It shaves close enough to get a good respirator seal, which is close enough for me. It's impossible to injure myself with it, and it's so easy to use that I can literally shave while browsing the web. Unless you are concerned with getting the closest shave possible, electric seems the o…

Which model? I have a Philips one blade and it is pricey to replace and needs to be replaced often

I have a Braun series 5. It recommends replacing the cutting head after 18 months.

Re: Shaving is an example of how consumer products extract more money

#509

Post by kareemsabri »

jader201 wrote: post #398

Why is a thread on electric razors not the top comment on a post about the expense/waste of straight razors? I get that they have some downsides, but if we’re talking about the expense/waste of straight razors, then it would make sense to consider electric razors. I’ve seen so many ads about companies trying to “invent” the most effective, lowest cost straight razor and it still confuses me, given we already have ele…

It's weird that men still shave at all to be honest. The world is casual enough that you're not expected to have a "close" shave. I use a Wahl Peanut with no guard, takes maybe one minute. Costs $65 and lasts 5 years easily.

You can also use it to give yourself a buzz cut, if you're so inclined, and save even more money.

Re: Shaving is an example of how consumer products extract more money

#510

Post by stouset »

gruez wrote: post #427
tristor wrote: post #378

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Also, claiming that they "seem to be poisonous" without any qualifiers is a little misleading. To my knowledge they're only poisonous during manufacturing (ie. the precursor chemicals) and when they get too hot. 1. The manufacturing process results in those precursor chemicals entering urban water supplies where they are nearly impossible to filter out (only RO is effective and it's not even 100% effective), and on…

>1. The manufacturing process results in those precursor chemicals entering urban water supplies where they are nearly impossible to filter out (only RO is effective and it's not even 100% effective), and once in the bloodstream of people are powerful endrocrine disruptors which circulate and are filtered slowly by the kidneys... and when peed out go right back into the water supply due to not being able to be remove…

> Sounds like a lot of work to me. In other words, the teflon pan is actually more convenient.

It’s actually zero work, despite the recent uptick in people who think you need to coddle a cast iron pan. Most of the tips people give for dealing with cast iron are pointless extra work or actively make it perform worse.

I wash mine with soap and water and it takes about a minute, or about as long as washing a Teflon pan. Frequently I don’t even bother with this, and just wipe it out with a paper towel.

There was no need to jump through hoops to specially season the thing. Just use it, and its non-stick properties increase over time. It’s zero maintenance and I’ve had the damn thing for over a decade now.

Post reply on HN