> There isn't a mechanic there, but it's helpful for people who know how to change their oil or put new brake pads on but are not allowed to work on cars where they live.

If you go at the right time, you can also often find someone who is willing to teach you these things, despite not being a professional mechanic.

Mutual Aid _means something_[0], and it's not just places where people share tools to work on their own stuff, but it is that too.

These sorts of places aren't uncommon because maybe, just maybe, that's how things have been for eons and naturally have been as an evolutionary adaptation to millennia of change. In this case, cars are the focus. But one could see the expansion of the concept.

The IQ thing is barely a side story. An attention grabber. People will focus on that, and some will use it to add to the pile of things to care more about the point. But I hope some will accidentally see it as, "hey, smart people do smart things so mutual aid is a smart thing."

[0](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mutual_aid_(organization_theor...)

I've always been curious about this, how do you possibly handle the liability? Somewhere, some entity owns the property. Once one guy drops a brake rotor on his foot and breaks it, who covers the legal expenses?

> I'd bet that almost any town of more than 100,000 people, maybe even less, has places like this.

I'd argue the reverse--these kinds of co-ops are more likely to be found in smaller, cheaper, more rural towns. The key to these kinds of places is "cheap real estate with few restrictions".

As soon as the town starts getting too prosperous, they force these kinds of businesses out of the area.

> This “problem” of managing decisions about abundance reminds me of a report that linguist Daniel Everett wrote as he was learning from a hunter-gatherer community in the Brazilian rainforest. A hunter had brought home a sizable kill, far too much to be eaten by his family. The researcher asked how he would store the excess. Smoking and drying technologies were well known; storing was possible. The hunter was puzzled by the question—store the meat? Why would he do that? Instead, he sent out an invitation to a feast, and soon the neighboring families were gathered around his fire, until every last morsel was consumed. This seemed like maladaptive behavior to the anthropologist, who asked again: given the uncertainty of meat in the forest, why didn’t he store the meat for himself, which is what the economic system of his home culture would predict.

> “Store my meat? I store my meat in the belly of my brother,” replied the hunter.

Controversially, I think we wait too much opportunity for charity on avoiding free riders.

Not everyone is equally intelligent. Not everyone is equally athletic. Not everyone is equally financially apt. Not everyone is equally generous. Not everyone is equally capable. Not everyone has enough resources for themselves, never-mind enough to share.

Free riders should be considered part of charitable activities. We should give freely to all, not just those humble enough to reject it.

So kick out the freerider! Avoiding doing anything about a problem just because there's potential that some asshole is going to come around is not a good reason to avoid helping others. Some asshole is going to come around and disturb you anyway, might as well help out other people while you're at it.