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

91–100 of 392 posts

Re: Buy well, buy once

#91

Post by throwaway74513 »

nicbou wrote: post #64
jrflowers wrote: post #35

I enjoyed this article about the minimalist man getting two minimally useful extra wallets.

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 the opposite because I try to be as minimalist as I can and am constantly throwing away or donating objects that I don’t need or that don’t meet my quality standards.

I always thought it was strange that I don’t match this one specific symptom of OCPD, but then I started thinking some more, and I realized that I do obsess over objects in a way but not by hoarding them. If I want to order nail clippers for example, I have to spend hours online researching the best pair of nail clippers. I am currently wiring my house for networking, and everything has to be of the highest quality using data center components. Even rented a Fluke network tester. Closet needs repairs? Now I’m learning about drywall and level 5 skim coats. It’s a nightmare because I can’t do anything in a way that I consider half-assing it — I feel compelled to either do nothing at all or go into an extreme level of detail with it.

This constantly causes relationship and work problems, but to a lesser degree than I suppose hoarding stuff would.

Re: Buy well, buy once

#92

Post by balaji1 »

notatoad wrote: post #61
mberning wrote: post #52

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Therein is the kernel of every hoarder pathology, which is ironic. “This is too to get rid of!” Wrong. Throw it away and don’t replace it.

or if throwing it away makes you feel bad, give it away. either it finds its way to somebody who will value it, or somebody will throw it out for you. either way is a win.

Giving things away definitely is a win. Good Will seems to be a quick solution for this - is it a good place to give things away? Hope the things find a second life.

Re: Buy well, buy once

#94

Post by emodendroket »

I vacillate on this a lot. On one hand, yes, it's nice to have well-designed items that last decades or a lifetime. And obviously we're awash in disposable goods at great environmental cost. On the other, who hasn't been burned by buying a garment "for life" that no longer fits, no longer appeals to us, or otherwise gets rendered unusable? Or buying a beautiful, premium tool that only sees one or two uses? Or having an item that by all rights should have been disposable last for years of regular use?

Re: Buy well, buy once

#95

Post by emodendroket »

nicbou wrote: post #64
jrflowers wrote: post #35

I enjoyed this article about the minimalist man getting two minimally useful extra wallets.

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.

It sounds kind of woo, but I tried the Konmari method and it really was helpful without being overly prescriptive. It definitely felt good to get rid of a lot of that stuff. Though there are a couple that I'd probably take back if I could do it over.

Re: Buy well, buy once

#96

Post by emodendroket »

patrec wrote: post #76
jrflowers wrote: post #35

I enjoyed this article about the minimalist man getting two minimally useful extra wallets.

One also has to admire Whitstable man's marketing genius if he's able to live of his $100 "wallets" (which mostly amount to two badly sewn together pieces of leather). This article feels a bit too on the nose though. But he probably knows his audience.

They're really more like card holders, but I looked up that term and found they've now been rebranded as "minimalist wallets." Hey, even minimalism can be commoditized and sold. All that is solid melts into air after all.

Re: Buy well, buy once

#98

Post by aardvarkr »

emodendroket wrote: post #94

I vacillate on this a lot. On one hand, yes, it's nice to have well-designed items that last decades or a lifetime. And obviously we're awash in disposable goods at great environmental cost. On the other, who hasn't been burned by buying a garment "for life" that no longer fits, no longer appeals to us, or otherwise gets rendered unusable? Or buying a beautiful, premium tool that only sees one or two uses? Or having…

For the tool conundrum, I’ve found that the best course of action is to buy the cheapest option (within reason) to start with. If you don’t use it, no sweat, it was cheap. On the other hand, if you use it soo much that it breaks it you outgrow it then you get to buy the best version of that tool. At that point you know what you like and don’t like, as well as what’s worth paying extra for, so you end up with the perfect tool for you.

Re: Buy well, buy once

#99

Post by pfannkuchen »

safety1st wrote: post #84
joshcanhelp wrote: post #75

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Thank you for this, it put into words my uneasiness with this practice. Our household definitely has too much stuff and we always seem to be at battle with it but minimalism just feels like a mirror image problem.

> Replacing broken or worn items often feels like a nightmare of upheaval and system change It seems like if this is where someone's application of minimalism lands them, they have missed the point. On that note I went from owning one pair of shoes last year to three. It was a great non-minimalist decision. My shoes now take three times longer to wear out, and now I'm always wearing shoes that are more useful or more…

Whenever I try to do this, I inevitably settle on wearing one of the three 100% of the time. How do you manage it?

Re: Buy well, buy once

#100

Post by emodendroket »

aardvarkr wrote: post #98
emodendroket wrote: post #94

I vacillate on this a lot. On one hand, yes, it's nice to have well-designed items that last decades or a lifetime. And obviously we're awash in disposable goods at great environmental cost. On the other, who hasn't been burned by buying a garment "for life" that no longer fits, no longer appeals to us, or otherwise gets rendered unusable? Or buying a beautiful, premium tool that only sees one or two uses? Or having…

For the tool conundrum, I’ve found that the best course of action is to buy the cheapest option (within reason) to start with. If you don’t use it, no sweat, it was cheap. On the other hand, if you use it soo much that it breaks it you outgrow it then you get to buy the best version of that tool. At that point you know what you like and don’t like, as well as what’s worth paying extra for, so you end up with the perf…

Yes, this is a commonly recommended strategy. But you do run the risk of being stuck with an unsatisfying but functional tool you feel guilty getting rid of, and even in the best case, who feels good about having bought a lousy tool that breaks?

I tend to go with a bit of a sliding scale based on factors like "how often do I expect to use it?" and "how afraid am I of it injuring me?"

Post reply on HN