Hacker News Reader

Comment by technofiend | Hacker News Reader

It's definitely a generational thing and younger folks have never seen a repair and retain society or scarcity that drives that hoarding attitude. And unless they collect or inherit vintage equipment (survivor bias aside) they haven't purchased anything designed to last many years much less decades.

Before anyone accuses me of slagging on Millennials I don't mean it that way. I mean since we have a manufacturing base that is in my opinion far more aggressive about planned obsolescence than 50+ years ago and several generations used to cheap, low quality goods manufactured overseas why would they want or need anything else? We value the novel and inexpensive over the durable.

View on HN

I disagree; I think it's as much a personal preference as it was in the past. I don't deny that things are not built to be repaired nowadays, but that doesn't mean that everyone in the past was good about self repair. Stuff could be repaired but much of what we collect and hoard isn't that, it's trinkets and decorations. My grandmother, for example, had several rooms in her basement dedicated to Christmas decorations, neverminding the rest of the household items and junk she had collected. It took a few months to clear it because my mother and Aunt wouldnt just give it away.

My mother wasn't quite as bad, but she used to have her own mountain of decorations until I got her to agree to let me get rid of about 75% of it. It's still taking up about 12 or so large plastic storage bins, but it's way less than it had been.

Nowadays we do want durable items even if we are more at leisure to replace them. I am very happy that most of the easy to fail components in my MacBook Air are replaceable (I/O board, fan, battery, SSD) and would love it if other parts were too. Working on computers for as long as I have I know people like to get what they can out of a computer; the number who just go buy a new one when it dies isnt as high as you'd think. Same with other items like phones, cars, etc.

I grew up in the 70s in the U.K. and I always laughed at the way that at Christmas my grandparents (and parents on occasion) would save string from parcels and fold up particularly nice wrapping paper from presents they received.

Of course, now I realise jus how close the Second World War was. If the war had finished in 1997, with rationing continuing until 2007, I too might be loathe to throw things away.

My MIL has not left the 70s and still does this. You can watch the discomfort on her face when she watches my 4yr old girl destroy good wrapping paper, or even rip open an envelope instead of saving it for re-use.

I save all the padded envelopes and never get to reuse them because apparently I don't send enough random stuff. And I was born in the 80s and there's no obvious reason.

But I draw a line at normal paper :)

Ah yes. The stack of padded envelopes. I have those too :(

Hahaha. My mother still does that. She has boxes full of neatly folded used gift wrapping paper.

She also used to wash ziploc bags for reuse.

Moreover, we see the same thing today with digital items. (Well, to be honest, we already saw this 20 years ago with digital items.)

There, it is just not so visible because disk space is ever increasing as well as getting cheaper.

In the days of Napster, people collected gigabytes of music just to have it - at some point this was more minutes than they could ever listen to in a life span.

Few people actually care to collect that stuff in order to make it accessible to more people. For example, the people at archive.org, as well as many libraries, are doing a great job.

But the majority of collectors collect only for their own, usually with an unwieldy directory structures and meaningless file names (track1, track2, ...). They won't ever find anything they search for. It's often faster to search & buy those via Internet. Same with movies.

It is even worse with personal photographs and videos. The same way some people have loads of paper photographs around, other have disks full of digital photographs. 200+ photographs per day of vacation are not uncommon. Who will ever look at those?

Reducing those to the "best" 10-20 items already feels like an imposition to most. Reducing those further to 1 photograph to summarize the vacation is considered extremist by most. And even then, they will just mark the best photos, but won't delete anything except for the most blurred garbage photos.

Even more strangely, some people do feel the urge to clean up their mess, but as with physical items, deleting loads of digital items takes a lot of time for them. This is the next round of absurdity: They would rather spend a weekend (or full week) on finishing their photo/video archive than to go out for another trip.

Maybe we need a "digital item" version of Paul Graham's classic "stuff" article? http://paulgraham.com/stuff.html

You'd be surprised how little music "gigabytes" is. 8 years ago my friend once decided to listen to every song in his music library in order, only took him 2 months.

I have thousands of albums in my google play account, go through spurts of adding more, and constantly listen to the whole collection on shuffle. It shows how many times each song has been listened to, it's rare for me to ever see a song without at least one play.

Good point for music, but if you add podcasts, youtube clips, movies and serials to this list, you quickly have mutiple terabytes that you can't ever consume in a healthy way.

(And playing it on a TV screen in the background while doing computer/tablet/smartphone stuff is not what I would consider "healthy" consumption, because then it is more a source of noise than anything else. You can't really enjoy it and miss most of the movie.)

Ah, this makes sense. Maybe its a generational thing but I notice my parents do love their trinkets/mementos. They are avid travelers and try to get something from wherever they visit. When I visit new places, my memory of the place is mostly: photos on instagram and facebook.

When my wife and I travel, we try to buy a magnet that is representative of the place.

It's small enough that it isn't an issue, and it's nice to look at the refrigerator and remember all the places we've been.

We also value space and time differently because it is so damn expensive. The things you own, own you in many ways, so reducing them increases living space, and time which are both in short supply.

Trinkets mean storage or displaying and dusting. Current generations are already going through a stage of ditching video, CD and DVD storage, and potentially book shelves too.

For me it's about practicality. I don't have space in my 600sqft 2 bed apartment, for the two dining tables, 4 double beds, 3 sets of tableware, 2 living room suites that my parents have in their 4 bed detached 1800sqft house, and I can't afford the space that they have because they bought it in the 80s.

In my experience its also a lack of a permanent home. Stuff becomes a liability when your landlord can kick out at short notice, or you are living in a tiny apartment.

Indeed. Moving frequently is the best way to prevent accumulation of too much "shit you don't need"!

I think it has very little to do with durability and a lot to do with the relative prices of manufactured goods versus real estate.

It's very easy for the floor space consumed by an object to exceed its value. Especially if you're renting, in which case you could probably assign an actual monthly monetary cost to keeping every single object in your flat.

Life is not that long either, and being an experience generation, there is a palpable opportunity cost to accumulating stuff you don't want. Just walking by an overcrowded garage or basement reminds you of the time it will take to deal with it, time that you could be using for a trip or something else stimulating.

> a palpable opportunity cost to accumulating stuff you don't want

Absolutely, it can be a real burden. Especially if it requires any kind of cleaning or maintenance.

Conversely the time cost of acquiring stuff has collapsed. You don't have to buy or hang onto stuff in advance of possibly requiring it if you can have it same-day shipped from Amazon.

I mean, I have a big problem with the, buy-throw-away-then-buy-again cycle too. We need to reduce consumption to ease environmental externalities.

The time it takes to "deal with it" has gone up quite a bit, too. When I was a kid the trash guys would haul anything away that was less than four feet wide. All kinds of furniture, beds, electronics, used paint... whatever. It all went into the same truck.

Now half the stuff you buy is toxic waste when you go to get rid of it. You have to make special trips to the place that collects paint, for instance, which isn't the same place as electronics. There are all sorts of projects my parents would have done without a second thought that I'll pass on because I don't want to spend all that time getting rid of stuff.

In the context of this article I'm not sure if it has so much to do with repair and retain as opposed to simply not wanting to own a bunch of stuff that will take up space and never get used. Fine china, silverware, crystal, etc.

I've always been annoyed by "fine China". If something is so fragile that it can't be used, then it is worthless to me.

On the flip side, it's kind of interesting that products made in china are now synonymous with "cheap crap", while at one time we held finely made, fragile cups from China on display in our homes.

Fine china of the generation we're talking about here is typically made in Europe - the fine bone china my grandmother owns was made in England. China in this context refers to porcelain, using techniques learned from China.

Fine china is fun. There is an endless and very cheap supply of these things on the fleamarket, so one can use them with abandon. If they break, just get more.

This is my opinion too. You can eat off great china for next to nothing.

Low-end auction houses are also great places to pick up whole sets on the cheap. At the very worst these are a lot more interesting than plain white junk.

I agree. I'm in this demographic, and it drives me crazy to have stuff sitting around that's not being used. My wife and I don't typically decorate with this kind of stuff either. We were /strongly/ encouraged to put things like crystal on our wedding registry. It sits in a cabinet unused. On the other hand, we also registered for earthenware type dishes, and we use the hell out of those. They are nice looking, durable, and extremely useful. Not "unitaskers" So glad we don't have fine china on top of that.

To me it seems more wasteful to have junk taking up room in your living space. Living with less is desirable.

> Fine china, silverware, crystal, etc.

But note that in particular is a cultural thing where people are cooking at home less, smaller families, less formality, etc.

Less formality, yes. You don't need $60 plates to host a dinner party when a $2 plate will do just fine. Plus, you don't need to worry about accidentally breaking one.

When the grandmother of $SO moved into an assisted living facility, we got pick some of her stuff, too.

We only took the silver cutlery and use it as every day.

There is just no need and space to waste for stuff that is kept out of usage, especially with something like silver cutlery which doesn't degrade by usage and even stays shiny if you use it constantly.

I'm one of the oldest millennials and my parents won't be dying for another 20-30 years unless shit happens, so you may be apologetic to the wrong generation.

I think this trend will actually change with us, my parents have loads of stuff that I'd like, and I've build half my furniture myself, and regularly fix things rather than buy new ones, despite not being handy at all, with YouTube teaching me how. The other half is things I've inherited from my grand parents. Not because I liked it, at first anyway, but because I don't really want to own something with a CO2 footprint leading all over the world or things were build by slave labour.

Besides, the quality and detail in old hand made stuff is so much better than the shitty gluewood you buy in ikea.

Of course that's just my view on things based on myself and my circle of friends, who are strikingly similar to me when I think about it, and we could simply be odd millennials.

Pretty understandable to throw away the past and make it anew. Unfortunately unless you understand that the exercise is just that: exercise, and that there is nothing truly new under the sun you misplace your importance and priorities. Learn from other peoples mistakes and don't fix what isn't broken. If these two precepts were persistent there would be constant advancement.

As far as your concepts go on C02 and inherited guilt..grow up.

> As far as your concepts go on C02 and inherited guilt..grow up.

Are you suggesting only children and youth care about the environment? If true, that's terrible!

(Edit: A downvote doesn't explain what I've misunderstood.)

'If true that's terrible!' Why don't you research what you believe and get to the bottom of the issue(s)? Why don't you at least look at what the economic factors involved imply contra the 'objective' science and take a look at how the pendulum swings. Yes, there is climate change, yes we are involved. But this type of emotional outcry based on taught thought is stupid.

My parents' entire generation seem to think the same thing, but I don't buy the "scarcity" argument. I don't think it was ever true. Planned obsolescence was a concept pioneered (and coined) by those very generations. From its beginnings in the depression-era auto market to its peak in the fashion driven 1950s with cars designed to last three years or so.

Fashion-driven, low-quality overpriced US cars left the market wide open for cheap, high-quality foreign imports in the 1970s - and forced US manufacturers to significantly increase quality. That's pretty much the opposite of the story you're telling.

Instead I see a society which had a post-WWII manufacturing abundance just binging on material goods to the point that they were buried in stuff in a way that has never really happened before and people don't have good mechanisms for dealing with. At least not until they realise that "stuff" is the problem.

Both my parents and grandparents would claim that they bought stuff that lasted but they just bought the trendy items of the 1950s and 1980s respectively, and 90% of it went in the trash years ago.

That is true. I see it also on how my parents act with leftovers. If I have leftover food of certain things, I tend to throw it away and rather buy fresh. I am throwing it also sometimes away because I know for sure now that I won't eat it in the future.

On the other hand, my parents put away all leftovers and eventually also eat it. It is pretty similar with many other every-day things.

I just lived with my parents for a few weeks after living abroad for 5 years and noticed how they have kept so many things that I have seen when I was a child. I am not even talking about 1 or 2 things, but many (or most) things.

> If I have leftover food of certain things, I tend to throw it away and rather buy fresh.

I find it difficult to appreciate this viewpoint. There's a certain elegance in using your resources efficiently and not wasting things. I find it significantly more satisfying to find a use for things rather than discarding them. This also applies to possessions, and more abstract things like writing code and not wasting lines of code or memory, or writing and not wasting words.

You seem to be making a moral argument for why to save leftovers.

I prefer to buy fresh food because I believe it's healthier and I have the money to do so.

IMO throwing away good food is morally wrong. Luckily there are movements ("food redesign" etc) that try to reverse the trend.

I'm kind of surprised that some people don't eat leftovers. While it's understandable from a taste perspective the time required to cooking fresh food every day, assuming you cook most meals, seems staggering.

My father taught me to never waste meat. Something alongs of the lines of "that animal didn't want to die. So don't it go to waste."

I agree to focus most on the meat, mainly because it takes 10x the resources per pound to produce compared to vegetables, so it's the most valuable resource.

It gives me a warm feeling to hear advice like that being taken to heart. I would like to say that I always do the same, but I know that this will stick in my mind.

Glad I could share my father's wisdom :)

A lot of food is nicer the next day.

Anything spicy improves with a little time, and I've found the same to be true with tomato sauce and cooked cheese - so curries, chillies, lasagna etc etc all improve. soup is often better the next day too.

the time required to cooking fresh food every day, assuming you cook most meals, seems staggering.

Sure, but it's time I enjoy spending. Some people play computer games or watch TV for an hour after work to relax, I cook dinner.

Using left overs is a way to cook more complex meals!

If you enjoy handling food then learning about handling left overs is a big part of that. If you go back and look at weekly food schedules from the past you will see patterns, were people cook one type of food day one to have base or ingredient for the next few days of cooking.

My comment was not so much about leftovers as it was about the time it takes to cook. And while I certainly do use the leftovers I end up with, I also try cook in such a way that it minimizes leftovers.

How is it morally wrong to throw away something I know I'm not going to finish? What am I supposed to do with it? I can't buy smaller sizes. It would be morally wrong if I bought 5 loafs of bread and threw out 4. Then I agree.

The morally wrong part is with not finishing it later. Stick it in the fridge and eat it for lunch or evening snack next day. Or make a meal which includes the leftovers as ingredients (leftover pasta sauce goes as pizza topping, and so on)

It obviously depends on the circumstances. I am more talking about the pattern of wasting, than accidentally wasting food now and then.

This happens at our family gatherings all the time. Our day-to-day consumption habits are a lot healthier than our "treat ourselves at a family gathering" food selection.

At the end of the gathering, everyone "fights" (politely, but very insistently) not to be the ones to take it home, 'cause they'll be forced to not let it go to waste.

I usually throw these because I don't mind binning unhealthy food I can easily replace rather than further harming my health. The latter is a far more useful and expensive acquisition than a quarter-pound of $25/lb cheese.

Is your argument: people are starving in the world, so it is morally wrong to throw away food?

It's more that if you use the rest of the food the next day, you will consume less new food the next day, and thus consume less resources, and a little less resources is spent on food production.

A staggering 50% of the food produced is wasted somewhere along the line. If you look at moving towards a sustainable society, food waste is actually a huge sub-problem of that, which has to be solved at some point, instead of cutting down ever more rainforest every year etc. etc. to sustain the current wasteful lifestyle.

Our parent generation didn't waste food, and the next generation will probably not be able to either (simply from rising prices).

In a world that sustainably generated enough food for everyone, it would not be wrong to throw away food. It might be that we can get there. Food production today is not sustainable, so at least let's not waste it.

If you press me, yes, I'm sure there's an element of "it's in bad taste" there too that made me react so strongly (it's similar to how rich kids pour out good champagne on the floor to display their wealth). That's closer to your suggestion.

I was ramen poor for a year or so after moving countries on my own as a teenager. Since then I must eat everything I make. My parent's generation will often leave food on their plate to show that they can afford to do that, so I guess it goes around in circles.

My strategy on leftovers is to make just enough of a surplus for supper, that it furnishes my lunch the next day.

I own a Sony radio that is probably 15 years old... It's been around for greater than 60% of my life. My laptop is three years old. My TV is 5 years old (and I have no plans on replacing it anytime soon). The reason I don't have much stuff is because I'm diligent to get rid of things I don't use anymore like old books, charging adapters, electronics etc. Some millennials may be buying cheap novel stuff, but many of us are opting to only have a few quality things we use frequently.

Aye. My Rotel system + Infinity speakers are ~20 years old, and even does beautiful 5.1 multichannel through the HTPC after finding a DB25 to RCA cable with my Asus Xonar Deluxe soundcard. I had to replace the baffles on the Infinity speakers after the first decade; sound is just as good if not better than when I bought the system (thanks to that Xonar card).

A few months ago our 11 year old Nilfisk vacuum cleaner broke down. Back then it was about A$450. Instead of buying an equivalent new one for ~A$700 or so, I repaired it for ~A$250. I figured it'd still be better than buying a new $200-300 vacuum every 2-3 years.

Sometimes buying expensive stuff is the cheaper option.

I love stuff that's durable and repairable, but it's so hard to come by these days. And even things that are theoretically repairable often aren't worth doing so (e.g. refrigerators).

I have Oneida flatware, solid wood furniture, and a Blendtec blender because these things will last. I don't want to buy flatware ever again, and, because I bought quality the first time, I won't have to, and I wish there were more things I could buy for life.

I grew up in a postsocialist country so I think I did experience a repair and retain society of scarcity at least in my childhood[1] and through strong cultural tradition later. But you know what? I just don't have room to repair and retain stuff. I have to throw things away when I buy new and better things. I'm cash rich and space poor. It is often cheaper to throw things away and buy again later. Or better still, rent stuff you don't need often.

[1] when I was a kid we'd go shopping in Italy or Austria because so many things/brands (clothes, toys, food, everything really) simply weren't available at home or were significantly cheaper across the border. We would also repair eeeverything for as long as we could and take extra care to treat things nicely so they wouldn't wear or break.

I think this has a lot more to do with depression/WWII era children having been brought up not to waste anything. That leads to the garage fulls of stuff that just can't be thrown away / donated. This was all reinforced during the 1970s/1970s era recessions. Both my parents are part hoarder and have basements / garages full of stuff.

It's definitely a generational thing and younger folks have never seen a repair and retain society or scarcity that drives that hoarding attitude

At the point that the fountain of artificially cheap consumer goods from China dries up, they are in for a rude awakening. Suddenly quality items made to last by local craftsmen won't seem so old-fashioned!

I have a number of things that were made back when repairing was the norm. Unfortunately, I know now if it were to break I wouldn't be able to find a repairman who knew what to do with it for any price I could afford. It'll become cheaper to buy throwaway stuff since the bills for repair are high (or more likely, I'll hoard the stuff until I can save up enough for the repair - but this is difficult when I don't have my own permanent place to live).

Unfortunately this is a problem that perpetuates itself. As more people buy the throwaway goods, repairmen see business dry up, and become rarer. The ones left are expensive.

Quality items made to last by local craftsmen sound great! As long as there's any craftsmen left by the time people turn to them for business.

Then we'll just move to the artificially cheap consumer good from Africa (subsidized by Chinese investment). And the cycle will go round and round!

> We value the novel and inexpensive over the durable.

That's what we're sold, it doesn't mean it's what we value. If there was an easy way to tell durability at time of purchase, I think the trend would shift very quickly.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com