We ended up with a Samsung fridge in our new home. It has no external display or any other indication that it is a "smart" fridge. I only found out when a friend visited who has a Samsung phone and the phone offered to connect to the fridge. We spent the next 30 minutes removing panels from the fridge and found the wifi/bluetooth antenna on a small board under the top-right hinge cover. The board was disconnected and the fridge continues to operate normally.
Samsung has made garbage appliances for my entire life. A family member went through about 3 different samsung fridges before they swore them off for good. The compressor would routinely break after only a year or 2 of service.
I will never own a Samsung or LG appliance. They are built almost explicitly to force you to get a new one in a couple of years.
Then couple that with both companies trying to use weaselly legal maneuvers like putting the EULA that agrees to arbitration on the outside of a box and saying "If you open this box you agree to the EULA".
> Samsung has made garbage appliances for my entire life.
When I moved into my first own flat, family, friends and colleagues pressured me to buy good appliances. They will last longer they said.
Buy Miele for a washing machine, nothing else, they said. I didn't had the money for that, so I bought a washing machine for 250 Euro. It has been going for 11 years, moved two times and doesn't show any signs of going out.
Another friend told me he only buys Samsung fridges. Best machines, one shouldn't buy anything else. I bought a fridge for 200 Euro because I liked the retro look and its red color. Also going strong for 10 years and moving two times. He has got the third Samsung fridge in 10 years now.
Yeah, that's anecdotal but I haven't really found the part where buying something more expensive really helped with expanding its lifespan, rather the contrary where "high tech" broke earlier or more often.
>Yeah, that's anecdotal but I haven't really found the part where buying something more expensive really helped with expanding its lifespan, rather the contrary where "high tech" broke earlier or more often.
buy professional stuff that's expensive, not consumer gadgetry expensive.
a samsung fridge is expensive because of the gimmicks and high tech integrations.
a sub zero fridge is expensive because of the build quality and manufacturer network , part re-use and larger consumer part availability and market.
Funnily sub-zero fridges are considered the samsung of the semi-commercial brands. They prioritize things like customizable doors and easy to break but consumer loved features like ice makers and water dispensers. You will never see sub-zero in actual commercial kitchens.
The previous house I moved from had a Subzero fridge in it from 1990. It was serviced in 2012 and was still running strong when I left. One thing that pleased me was the easy access to a parts catalog and the ability to easily order replacement parts. Some of the tray slides had cracked and I just ordered them online after consulting the catalog. I know the unit cost a fortune in 1990, but decades of service and the ease of ordering parts was certainly nice.
Many 250 appliances are targeted at landlords who care that the applicance is cheap and works for years without complaints. They don't care about features - they will never use them - just that it is good enough to check the box and the users don't get so mad they complain. They also don't care that it looks good so you get things that look cheap but last.
Note that I said many above. there are also 250 appliances built for the penny wise and pound foolish - they will break in a few years (just long enough that the warranty is up).
Even knowing that though, often there are features of the more expensive appliances that while not needed are nice enough that I'm willing to pay extra.
> Buy Miele for a washing machine, nothing else, they said. I didn't had the money for that, so I bought a washing machine for 250 Euro. It has been going for 11 years, moved two times and doesn't show any signs of going out.
Washing machines are a solved problem and it does not need a high tech solution. A good, reliable motor and good weights is pretty much it. No need for brittle over-engineering, fragile touchscreens or temperamental sensors.
When I had to buy one, I got a basic Beko* because they are usually good with replacement parts, and it had the bare minimum in terms of electronics. It was also one of the cheapest, but that’s a consequence of the other criteria more than something I optimised. I would be reluctant to get a no-name Chinese one, even if it is cheap. Anyway, it’s been going for 5 years now just like on the first day. Very happy with it.
> He has got the third Samsung fridge in 10 years now.
Fridges are also a solved problem. It’s just a cooling loop with a radiator on one side and a pump in the middle, and good thermal insulation. Using three of them in 10 years is not very impressive, decent ones should go forever. There is no reason why one should fail before 10 to 15 years.
> Yeah, that's anecdotal but I haven't really found the part where buying something more expensive really helped with expanding its lifespan, rather the contrary where "high tech" broke earlier or more often.
Definitely. But I would not say that going for cheap is the best strategy. Going for simple and sturdy is, and it is usually correlated with being cheap. But there’s also a lot of cheap disposable crap.
* I am not sure how well they are known around the world, it’s a Turkish brand. Their stuff is built mainly in Turkey and in my experience sturdy and easy to fix and repair, if a bit bare bones features-wise.
The curious thing about fridges is RV fridges run off propane/DC/AC, have no moving parts, and when in use are constantly jarred due to road motion, and never break down -- nothing to break. Unfortunately, these absorbtion fridges tend to retail for high prices.
I saw a Brazilian made one running off unscrubbed digester gas fed from the excreta of two immense pigs on a farm in Belize in 1996.
My 2004 RV has one and runs whenever I need it. I'd insall it in my house but I'd need to build a cabinet, chimney and gas piping for it first... so instead I have to listen to a compressor spinning when it runs.
No obsolescence, no spare parts, no breakdown, no posibility for continuing profit. Bad ideaQ
They’re also substantially less efficient. No full size fridge would ever use them because they’d chew tons and tons of power to cool in a residential house.
Awesome tech! Just generates heat and is inefficient compared to a compressor so it is less popular in the US. There are also electric absorption fridges.
>It has been going for 11 years, moved two times and doesn't show any signs of going out.
I replaced my AEG washing machine last year after ±10 years of service. The new one, also roughly 200 euro, uses a fraction of the energy, and cleans better. I should have swapped it out way earlier to save money.
Samsung/LG don't know how to build reliable white home appliances, or don't want to. Or black ones for that matter (remember FUBAR with Samsung bricking their expensive surround system for good? Not so long ago).
No reason to buy those when you have ie some basic Bosch stuff. TBH smart stuff should be left to computers and phones, rest should be dumb as brick. But folks keep buying it for some reason (ie hey Samsung makes good phones, lets buy their fridge), hence crapware everywhere.
In my family we have 3 fridges, 2 washers and 2 dishwashers, and our experience a bit different than the rest of the thread.
The fridges are dead-silent and working great for 7+ years. Washers are also nice, washing for a bit too long but don't wear the clothes down and have better stain removal performance than their peers, and dishwashers are extremely slow and not designed for European market. Their baskets are not suitable for our dishes, we can't fill them efficiently even.
So, from experience their fridges are A-OK, washers are great with some caveats, but dishwashers are not good.
My first choice is still BSH group and Beko, but Samsung is acceptable if required, but LG? Ain't nobody got time for that.
My Samsung fridge worked fine for ten years and then broke down. Apparently it was the first generation of some new compressor or something and it was known to be problematic. The new ones come with an extra long warranty on that bit
The fridges we have at least 10 year warranties on the compressor, that's right. Considering the last fridge we had worked for ~20 years, I'm eager to see how planned obsolescence will play on these, yet they work pretty nicely.
My own Siemens fridge is with me for ~14 years, as well.
Right now all the new refrigerators seem to have 2 year warranties, even the ones from Costco. At least they give you extra extended.
Last fridge I had was a Kenmore Elite with 10 year warranty, it failed to the same compressor issue that has been plaguing the LGs. It was replaced once under warranty but that failed 3 years later.
Just got a GE; first one was DOA, didn't cool at all. My thermometer is saying it's replacement is currently sitting at 44F when it is set at 34F, I have had it for 2 weeks....
It’s pretty well known in the US that LG washers perform better and have a far better parts and service network than Samsung. You think whatever you want though.
I'm not in the US though. The models, their performance and service networks are way different.
I have replaced shock absorbers and power switch of a 15 year old Beko washing machine last year, and it cost me 6$ plus workmanship to get genuine parts installed in 20 minutes.
I bet that won't be very possible over there, though.
Yale Appliance, Harper and Knowles. But I'm not sure why you think a snitty "but LG? Ain't nobody got time for that." deserves a more rigorous reply on an informal commentary site with delusions of grandeur. Like I said to the other dude, believe whatever you'd like.
But if you're out in the sticks and you can't do your own service you probably shouldn't buy either.
Why are you throwing LG in with Samsung? They routinely have some of the most durable appliances, check consumer reports if you don't believe me. They even offer ten year warranty on their direct drive washer and dryers
Out of all the fridges that LG sold, what percentage had issues? LG sells a lot of units, so even small percentages may end up with 'critical mass' of problems that gains wider awareness.
An article from an appliance retailer that has their own in-house service department, and so has statistics on repair rates of the various OEMs that they sell:
Yes, recently replaced an LG refrig with that issue. Its second linear compressor in eight years was dying the way the first one had (four years after purchase, with the sympathetic repairman telling us this second compressor was the “fixed” model and should last for quite a few more years), so we bailed on it. Its 1985-vintage Whirlpool predecessor had worked for 32 years, FWIW.
LG washers and dryers have consistently been one of the most reliable appliances I have owned.
Other than minor design flaws like lettering that wipes off if laundry detergent contacts it (older models), that was the only issue I’ve had in 11 years.
My LG washer and dryer are just over 10 years old now. They haven't been flawless. I've had to repair both of them once. The washer had a pump go out so the clothes stayed soaked. The dryer had one of the rollers wear out. Both easy fixes under $50 following youtube videos. But we also have models before "smart" appliances were really becoming common. I'm still impressed by the washing machine. It gets cloths to "damp" before it's done. Far better than any other washing machine I've used before and cuts down on the work the dryer is doing.
I have an LG combined washer/dryer (I've used the drying less than 10 times in 3 years). I picked it because it wasn't too deep, so it could fit nicely in my small bathroom. I'm happy with how it cleans, but sometimes it will have an issue where it won't start spinning fast, because it has some sensor that detects that the unit shakes too much. It actually does shake, but it seems to have a hard time spreading the clothes so that it doesn't. Sometimes it will waste a good hour trying to start spinning. Not sure if it's somehow actually broken (like a busted damper or whatever), but this issue seems to have increased in frequency. And it does it both when there aren't many clothes and when it's rather full.
Huh, two houses back I had a really fucking POS dryer that I got expert at replacing the "Dryer Thermal Fuse" (pick your own youtube video walkthrough) and my foggy memory says in my ear that it was an LG dryer. So I'm thinking, this commenter malfist, doesn't know what he is talking about and I'll go look in my notes.org and... NOPE! It was a Samsung DV42H5000EW/A3 model!
Sorry malfist for thinking bad thoughts. I've redirected all that negative energy back to its rightful owner: Samsung.
The washer next to that dryer was an LG, and in my notes I never touched it.
Always good to reattach to reality.
Ah, I see that the washer/dryer pair we bought new 4 years ago and hauled across the country are LG ThinQs. Very happy with them. Apparently can be "smart" but I shut that down.
I understand the axe to grind, but what about their spy tech hurts durability or warranty prospects; the thing your comments' parent was talking about?
Do you not think it's relevant to mention to people that the appliance that they have in their house might be listening to everything they're saying and uploading it to LG's servers? A quick Google search shows that LG has WiFi enabled dishwashers/washing machines.
If you can disable the spying, then it's an irrelevant factor in the purchasing decision.
Would you prefer an A-grade quality appliance that can spy but that spying can be disabled, or a B-grade appliance that doesn't spy but needs replaced in three years?
My Samsung laser printer is pretty good. Was cheap, works since purchase a decade or so back, doesn't try to extort you. Unfortunately HP bought Samsung printers after and discontinued the extortion free ones.
I think it may depend on the LG appliance. Their washers and dryers are generally rated pretty well and last a long time (personal experience). They are generally pretty self-repairable and parts aren't obscene (again, personal experience).
That said, next go around, I'm buying a top loader Speed Queen Commercial washer and dryer. The ones with analog knobs.
But yeah, I'd never buy a Samsung appliance and that seems to be universal advice among the clued.
I'd never buy one of their TVs or fridges (given the whole shoving ads into everything, probably nothing of theirs with a screen), but we did have a great experience with one of their washer and dryers. The dryer lasted us seven years, and we replaced the washer at the same time though it still worked. It's lifetime included our child's cloth diapers phase, they saw some heavy use.
Where we live (Kazakhstan), we had a Samsung fridge, AC and TV for about 7 years without any issues whatsoever. After moving to a new apartment, we bought another Samsung fridge and it has been quietly humming along for over 2 years now.
Any product from almost any manufacturer has built-in obsolescence - unless you go mid-high end, like Bosch etc.
Sammy/LG/GE business models aren't built on services but volume. If you buy a third party warranty service, that solves the issue somewhat, but they churn out so many models that parts become scarce.
You just got lucky or your models are from a different era. I don't want to drop money on Bosch, so I buy the cheapest ones and just replace them when needed.
Could be more features lead to more problems. Ice makers are highly desirable and often problematic.
Could be that US runs on 120vac and that means a lot of different parts.
Could be the US market gets more advanced compressors and what not to meet energy efficiency requirements (and maybe reduced noise) and Kazakhstan gets a simpler refrigerator that just keeps working.
damn I really like my samsung fridge and dishwasher that ive had for just over 2 years. Hopefully my fate is not the same cause that dishwasher is quieter than a church mouse. if it is, back to the scratch and dent appliance store for something else I guess
Samsung has been around for a while now. I wouldn't be surprised if they finally decided to fix their issues and new ones work fine. However I still won't be allowing them in my house for a few decades at least to be sure. Partially because I was burned in the past.
Since you already have them I wish you luck. Maybe they now last.
I wonder if it's a regional difference. Here in the UK I have their fridge and dryer - both came with 5 year warranty. My inlaws have their fridge in Poland, that came with a 10 year warranty on the compressor. They've had it now for 8 years and it's been working fine. Obviously it's anecdotes, but if a company offers 10 years warranty for something I tend to see that as a strong signal it's going to be at least somewhat reliable.
As a counterpoint, my Samsung fridge has survived for 15 years, which is significantly longer than my mom's Maytag and Whirlpool fridges. Those two brands guarantee parts availability for decades...but that's because you'll need to fix them constantly.
There's an old joke floating around if anyone remembers where it's from:
A tech enthusiast has the latest and greatest smartphones, voice assistants, and everything else cool and flashy. A programmer has a single inkjet printer from the 90s, and they keep a shotgun by their bedside in case it makes a noise.
I always joke with people that I hate software in anything but a traditional computers _because_ I'm a software engineer. I want the car with the fewest smart features, a normal door bell, a non-smart washing machine.
Software sucks a lot of the time and it often gets in the way, at least the way it's deployed over the last decade. Very few things in my home should connect to the internet. My phone and computers. Begrudgingly my TV now.
Also, those things that connect to the internet but don't let you have control? They get EOL'd, despite having paid a premium for them. I've never had a stove from this century and they all work fine, because why the hell wouldn't they?
Quitting work years ago helped, even though I still enjoyed software development. I had intended to instead work on my own investments, but I stopped that after I figured out money is a joyless and meaningless motivator.
Mostly just saying no to helping anyone with computer problems. Fortunately changed from Windows 7 to Linux, so I can be mostly honest when I tell people I don't understand their laptop problems.
Said no to helping family with with any printer issues after ~2005. I often print stuff, but I use the printer at my local library or printshop.
I still occasionally dabble, but only for those people I dearly love. I'm still very good at tech support, I just don't do it.
I've got my tech frustration level down to about the background radiation level (as politics or taxes).
Appliances with mandatory wi-fi is a bad trend. The mid-tier dishwasher from Bosch locks the Eco(nomy) energy saver cycle, delayed start, etc functionality behind a smartphone app. This requires connecting the dishwasher to wi-fi and using the smartphone to create a Bosch online account. That's what the whole Jeff Geerling complaint video was all about.
Aside: I heard that "eco mode" is typically not actually the most energy efficient mode on most washing machines. Apparently it's a standard mode they have to add so that energy efficiency can be measured across machines, but that means it can't be optimised.
You're typically better off looking for some kind quick/fast mode. Or even the "regular" mode.
Under EU Commission Regulation (EU) 2019/2023, washing machines sold in the European Union must include a mandatory standardized program called "Eco 40-60".
The whole point is to enforce strict legal limits on maximum water and electricity consumption per cycle based on the machine's rated capacity. This it the reason they tend to run for hours - it uses less water and energy than a standard cotton cycle by having longer soak times and using less electricity to heat the water.
In 1995 it took 94 litres of water and 350 kWh/a for a cycle in the average EU washing machine. These measures, amongst others, reduced that to 36 l/cycle and 96 kWh/a in 2020 and an expected 30 l/cycle by 2030.
Do you happen to know when this regulation came into effect? I bought a Siemens (same thing as Bosch, only with a different badge and colors) in 2023 and it only has a single ECO cycle that takes like four and a half hours. There's no other ECO cycle in the app, either.
That cycle is available via a button on the front panel and is actually the one that came selected by default. I can program it from the front panel, too. I think the app allows loading some more "special" cycles, but I never understood what those were good for.
All the functions of the washer are configurable through the front panel (water hardness, telling it it's connected to the hot water tap rather than the cold, how much rinse aid to use, etc).
The irony being that Eco loads are necessarily smaller, for soaking and to draw less current through the motor, so to do the same amount of clothes as one 'planet killer' wash you need to do at least two 'Eco' cycles.
TLDR: there aren't really any shortcuts to getting dirt out of clothes.
Using durable clothes for as long as they... endure. Definitely not flash fashion.
Since I live in a poor country, I am allowed to use cotton shirts until too much skin shows (hyperbole, I only allow one small hole) Then, it becomes a rag or a mop 100% of the time.
Having few stains in an worn bought-new shirt is a good indicator of not being rich and still having class.
Eco friendly means unfashionable most of the time. Smaller cars, or even public transport, god forbid.
It's one of those "optimize for X/Y/Z, pick two". The eco mode is usually the best for water usage, but it might use more energy. The fast modes might use more water but less energy. It's hard to do both and still get good results.
Countries with heavy investment in wind and solar are seeing periods of free or negative cost electricity. Ideally, batteries would soak this up for use during peak hours, but smart appliances can be a great way to take advantage. It's a shame that these companies cannot be trusted with our data!
It's true with basically all technology these days. We have a lot of cool and useful technology, but every company who will sell it to you has designed it so that the device you paid for is also being used by them to screw you over.
Could do all that with dumb timers. Funny thing is, the optimal way to run my A/C is simply a consistent temperature 24/7, so my dumb old thermostat is set to that (but it also has a timer if I want).
I'm skeptical of Samsung after having two LCD monitors dies at approximately the same usage hours. I think they were victims of the 2000s capacitor plague.
My house came with Samsung front load washer and drier. They're not wonderful but they're still running for the 6 years I've lived here. I had to replace the drier drum after the rollers deteriorated and gouged out holes in the drum. Then I had to replace the rollers again after a year because I bought cheap rollers :(
Ugh, I've avoided connecting my TV to Wifi to avoid all "smart" crap but it does support some "wireless" display from Windows that seems to be local based and I do get periodic requests to connect to other devices (My conundrum now becomes, is the TV safer with or without remote connection/updates).
The door refused to open. It said, “Five cents, please.”
He searched his pockets. No more coins; nothing. “I’ll pay you tomorrow,” he told the door. Again he tried the knob. Again it remained locked tight. “What I pay you,” he informed it, “is in the nature of a gratuity; I don’t have to pay you.”
“I think otherwise,” the door said. “Look in the purchase contract you signed when you bought this conapt.”
In his desk drawer he found the contract; since signing it he had found it necessary to refer to the document many times. Sure enough; payment to his door for opening and shutting constituted a mandatory fee. Not a tip.
“You discover I’m right,” the door said. It sounded smug.
From the drawer beside the sink Joe Chip got a stainless steel knife; with it he began systematically to unscrew the bolt assembly of his apt’s money-gulping door.
“I’ll sue you,” the door said as the first screw fell out.
Joe Chip said, “I’ve never been sued by a door. But I guess I can live through it.
"Never buy hardware that requires and app to use" has been my rule for a long time and I've never once regretted it. If the need for an app wasn't disclosed before purchase the item gets promptly returned.
What you should have done is install a webcam, connect it to some SuperMarket AI App Api (tm) and supply your credit card info. Now you never have to worry about food anymore. :)
I have a dishwasher that turned out to have an app. I quite like it, but I am going to try and isolate it and only get it integrated into Home Assistant.
Honestly baffled by this. You load the dishwasher and then go sit down on your phone, open an app, and turn it on? And that will be preferable to clicking start as you close the door?
No, I don't turn it on with the app, and it wouldn't be preferable to do that.
I'm happy to tell you why I like it to save you guessing again: I like knowing when the wash is done via a notification, and also to get status updates when things like salt are low.
For the dishwasher, I don't have such a need. But for the washing machine, I find it helpful to get a notification when it's done. I usually close the bathroom door while it runs, so I don't hear when it's done and will often forget about it.
Dishes can sit in the dishwasher after it's done for however long it takes me to remember to unload them, but leaving damp clothes in a closed box is something I'd rather avoid.
Personally I just set a timer. Having a wifi connection to have your appliance use an api to ping your app which has to be signed in introduces quite a lot of failure modes.
Rebuying decorations every year is also a leak on finances. Rebuying a bunch of camping gear (more than I can comfortably store in my home) is also a leak on finances.
It's far cheaper to use a storage unit for a lot of this stuff I do routinely use than buying and selling a house just to get more storage space at home.
I'm not blind to the fact not everyone just stores junk they never use. I'm certain there's a percentage of stuff in mine that is probably better off sold or trashed. But until we stop changing decorations for the different seasons, stop a number of hobbies with bulky stuff, or move to a giant mansion I just don't have the space and could use a few more square feet of pure storage space.
So give up on hobbies and everything occasional that requires some equipment since they can’t keep it at home, so basically give up on things that make life worth living to a lot of people. Yeah nah.
Every square footage of every home costs $$$ to keep in your possession. I pay a mortgage. I pay insurance. I pay taxes. I pay maintenance costs. There were acquisition costs in the purchase of it, and there will be acquisition costs wherever I go next. Not one square inch of my home is "free".
Suddenly that simple answer isn't so simple when actually confronted with reality, unless you're willing to be homeless and just carry your possessions in your hands.
Closets, basements, and attics cost you the same regardless of whether they are full of stuff or empty. "Free" in this case means no added monthly expense beyond the bare minimum to keep your dwelling.
> "Free" in this case means no added monthly expense beyond the bare minimum
So "free" as in "ignoring actual costs" and "ignoring opportunity costs".
Storage needs can change quite a bit over time. Household sizes sometimes change over time. Hobbies can change. Lifestyles can change. What was more than enough storage space several years ago can become not enough later on. Buying a bigger house to have more "free" storage space isn't really "free", especially as interest rates have increased massively over the years.
For instance, in the past my needs for storage for "camping gear" was largely handled by a single big backpack. Its just me, I'm down for pretty light camping. Now I've got multiple different sized tents for different kinds of trips, a sun shade, a whole family's worth of camping chairs, folding tables, camping stoves, multiple lanterns, camping related toys and activities, far more water storage, etc. What was easily stashed in a corner of a closet is now practically its own shelving unit.
i think they are suggesting to rethink the need for things like seasonal decorations if you are forced to pay a life long recurring fee for the privilege.
> if you are forced to pay a life long recurring fee for the privilege.
I have to regardless of a storage unit or in a closet in my house. That closet in my home and that shelf in my garage isn't free either.
So then it's just a question of owning anything at all or nothing, because it all has a life long recurring fee for the privilege of continuing to own it. And yes, my family finds value in decorating for holidays as a part of celebrating, remembering, and keeping traditions alive.
Sometimes people don't just want to live in the same IKEA box 365 days a year.
My garage doesn't even have enough space for all the various vehicles my family uses near daily. It doesn't have the space for the tools I use monthly. I barely even have the space for the workbench I use every other day. I have to have an additional shed to store a lot of other tools and supplies which get used consistently.
Your standard also doesn't make much sense. Garages can vary from barely being able to fit a compact car to having like a four car garage with a workspace area. You're saying that for both instances that's just perfectly the right amount of storage space for those people? The person with the small garage just isn't supposed to have any of the same hobbies as the person with the giant garage?
I guess I could just get rid of all these tools though. Every time I need something fixed I'll just not do it myself and just pay others instead of just doing things myself. I guess I could also just give up on a ton of hobbies we have. We can just throw away our family traditions that have been passed down for over a hundred years. I'm not wealthy enough to live in a house with enough storage space with the other constraints about where I'd like to live, so I guess I just don't get to have these hobbies and traditions and heirlooms.
Or I can just spend like $500/yr and still manage to keep all these hobbies and traditions and heirlooms.
I mean if you really use all of that stuff every single year then sure I guess you need the space but my experience is that the majority of people with space issues simply have a crapload of trash they never use and never will use but don't want to throw away.
I don't have space issues because I do get rid of stuff and I don't buy much stuff but I still have a bunch of stuff I would throw away or sell before renting a storage.
No, I'm not, and I've also never rented a storage unit.
It seems hard to imagine the sums involved becoming comparable to other amounts of money lit on fire to avoid fights with family though (i.e. home renovation, travel).
Who tf is breaking the bank on subscriptions and phone bills?
Are all these comments like yours coming from college students or what? If anything else, a storage unit is one of the most valuable things to pay for if you just moved out on your own.
This must be a generational issue. My kids took “their” things with them when they became autonomous adults. As parents, we raised our children that they would move out and establish their own identities and futures. We never created any expectation that their childhood home would serve as a storage facility, extended stay facility or even exist. We of course offer help and support when needed.
I know this is in conflict with a lot of modern parenting for many reasons. Our primary goal was to create independent, autonomous, fully functional adults capable of funding their own lives and determining their own future.
Kind of hard to take my stuff when I was attending college and then working clear on the other side of the country.
Other than renting a U-Haul and driving 2,800 miles, there weren’t many options. Which I even suggested, to which my parents insisted they were happy to hang on to the stuff until it was easier to do the handover.
>never created any expectation that their childhood home would serve…facility, extended stay facility or even exist.
Sounds like a pretty sad mindset to me. Between me and your kids, I wonder which are happier to visit their parents?
I once, in a divorce, sent at least two carloads (about 25 average size boxes) of personal belongings across the country by UPS. It cost like $600. If you’re a grown-up and settling somewhere after college, I think it’s a cool move to take your crap off your parents’ hands by shipping it to yourself when you’re home and at least blessing the disposal of the rest.
I get that some people even at 25, think they haven’t got a so-called “permanent address” except Mom and Dad’s (and I’m not being derisive, I have dear friends who felt like that), but none of us have a permanent home and I think it’s best if we mentally think of ourselves as not being “only temporarily here” as early in life as practical.
Honestly telling your kid going off to college (or elsewhere) "you have to take everything from you care about, the rest is going to go away" seems like a good way to stunt their independence. The natural reaction would be to take as much as they can of their current life, which is then going to be a burden preventing them from growing into a new life.
When you put it this way, it is very anxiety inducing and I understand that. What this is helping me realize is that my childhood, and our lives of our children were different than many of the commenters, not necessarily better or worse.
As children, my siblings and I didn't have a lot of stuff, and our family didn't have a lot of stuff either. It certainly wasn't our intent to traumatize and stunt our children and this doesn't seem to be the case. I will certainly ask them.
I somewhat expected my post would generate this type of attack and then lead to my parenting style is better than years, my kids are more successful than yours, my kids are happier to visit us than you, ad nauseam.
Parenting is hard and there are multiple approaches that lead to successful outcomes. Your approach worked and I am happy for you. Congratulations on your successful approach.
>I know this is in conflict with a lot of modern parenting for many reasons. Our primary goal was to create independent, autonomous, fully functional adults capable of funding their own lives and determining their own future.
This heavily implies that the children of other "modern" parents are dysfunctional adults. As they say "to throw the stone and hide the hand". The funnier thing is that your parenting style is a modern post-WW2 phenomenon.
There is no implication here. It is clearly stated as "Our primary goal", not your primary goal. You are reading way too much into this.
I agree it is a modern post-WW2 phenomenon, but not sure what is funny about it. Societies and systems constantly change and evolve. This is part of progress, and yes, can also cause setbacks.
My use of the term "conflict" might be what is triggering. Maybe "bucks the trend" or "not in line with" would be better.
Many approaches to parenting are successful. I presented my approach. Others work.
Now you're characterizing what you've done as progress, to defend characterizing it as opposed to modern parenting, and you anticipated attacks from other people. I'll tell you why I think you anticipated attacks after I tell you a reason why I disagree.
I agree that it has been a generational thing. It was called the "Me Generation." Me, me, me. In the animal kingdom, parents abandoning their children to be completely independent is mostly common among insects, lizards, and amphibians, and is associated with large litters and a massive death rate among them. It's not modern, it's a feature of creatures that are lower than mammals.
What's triggering is the fact that you've decided to brag about your superior parenting in public, and claim the evidence of that is that you have told your children that you're done with them. Nobody asked you, and you're aware that normal people don't do that to people that they are close to (hence the need to lecture.) Everybody raises their children to have the ability to be completely independent and self-sufficient. You just think you're uniquely successful at that, and that it somehow would be the child's fault if you've failed.
Your kids didn't ask to be born, and if you don't rescue them from their failure (at least initially), it will be a reflection on you. If we are in the same social circles, and I know about this, I will judge you. Even hearing you explain it, and your feigned confusion (I guarantee you have this conversation all the time), would make me wary of hiring you into a management position.
I'm not a lizard. I want everybody I care about to be self-sufficient, and I also don't want them to try to be unless they actually have to be. They have resources available to them that are not always being fully utilized, and when those resources can give them an advantage in any context, I would be angry if they weren't used.
There are always limits to self-sufficiency, because there are massive advantages to abandoning it: that's what we call civilization.
Very good points. Thanks for the insight and critique. There is a reason I don't wade into social topics and usually only comment on technical things I have worked on and this is helping me understand why!
> I somewhat expected my post would generate this type of attack
It may not have been your intention but your post had a combination of a somewhat smug, lecturing tone and patting oneself on the back which is a bit off-putting. And implicitly made a lot of assumptions about other parents' intentions/lived experience raising their children based on a single factor that's pretty insignificant like # of sq ft of child's belongings kept in the family home.
Also, for all you knew at the time you replied, OP could've still had stuff in their parents' attic because they joined the Marines at 18 and was even more independent than your own kids. There was a lot of projection onto a trivial story.
Plus "must be a generational issue" just sounds like more of the same "my generation was responsible/good/normal unlike kids these days" meme that gets repeated by every generation as they age and is tiresome to hear as an explanation for everything.
What stuff do you have that is worth keeping that wouldn’t fit in one or two storage totes. I would think anything of sentimental value like pictures, art, trophies, books, paperwork etc would be quite small.
When I was moving into a dorm, a few totes would have been a lot of my available space. I'm pretty glad my parents would let me pick and choose before clearing stuff out. Saving my childhood stuffed animals or favorite books so I can share them with my own kids someday is pretty meaningful to me, same thing I remember my parents doing. I don't know if I would have had the correct perspective to make those choices as a university freshman. Unless you immediately downsize after becoming an empty nester you're going to have way more storage space than you need anyways.
As a father of 3 kids under 5, we bought our house 2.5 years ago and it has appreciated so much that had we saved every penny for the last 2.5 years we couldn't have afforded it today.
It doesn't matter how high performing your kids are if no good opportunities exist. So while we hope the world will allow our independent, high performance kids to succeed on their own, we're planning on having to provide unique opportunities via resources/connections ourselves to make that happen. Accordingly we're treating our house as something of a family estate, to be held in perpetuity and they can live in as long as it's good for them. It's not about keeping them as forever-children, it's about providing a base with a secure perimeter from which they can marshal their resources. For instance, we're right in the middle of two major metros. So if they land an unpaid/underpaid but prestigious internship in one of them, they won't have to worry about housing.
A very interesting and valid observation. You and your children are super fortunate and your approach seems like a very good hedge against some serious uncertainty coming up.
We weren’t quite in the same position until much later, and I am somewhat envious of your position. Best of luck!
Likewise, and I wasn't trying to invalidate your approach. Raising independent kids who understand the imperative of building their own lives is absolutely necessary regardless of economic conditions
Growing up, actual peak existence was visiting Grandma's house and playing with my mom's old toys. The seemingly unlimited, completely novel hoard from another time. My son feels similarly about visiting my parents' house and playing with my old toys. This may or may not be sustainable but it seems like it is well on its way with four generations involved- from where I stand, keeping a good pile of consumerism around to pay it forward in 20 years doesn't seem out of proportion with the joy I've received. It's definitely a culture thing- nobody in my family tree seems to move much, and has decent taste in throwing out the actual trash and keeping stuff stored nicely over the long time gaps, then not being fussy about the next generation being pretty hard on stuff (within reason, as appropriate for their age)
> My kids took “their” things with them when they became autonomous adults.
College students both are and are not autonomous adults. It's not really practical to bring all your stuff to college housing, and you don't always graduate into a good job market where you can go directly to the workforce and a nice place where all your stuff fits. Not everyone can afford to, and that's fine, but if you can give your kids an easier transition to full autonomy, it seems reasonable.
If moving while the kids are in college, it's nice to keep their stuff somewhere.
You're right that this is a generational thing, but the expectation for your kids to move out like this is also relatively recent: historically it was a lot more common for your children to continue to live with you, or if not, to live very nearby. Arguably one of the biggest reasons for the modern birthrate dropping is that lack of local family ties to help with childcare.
(And yeah, for college this just isn't practical: college accommodation is temporary, tiny, and students have practically no money. Taking all your stuff with you to college is a lot of effort for very little gain).
A thousand dollars may as well be a million dollars. In my personal experience, gifting a thousand dollars to someone in housing distress will not lead to the purchase of a solar panel.
I'm talking about "working homeless" here. There are many people living out of their cars because they can't afford a proper home but still have money they can spend, and many of them in fact are living some kind of "stealth camper" setup with accompanying gear.
But that gear would have been infeasible even ten years ago - the status quo outside of luxury campers for six figures was absorber refrigeration [1] that needs a heat source - either powered by natural gas, which has challenges relating to safety as well as high consumption, or by electricity, which was lead-acid batteries back then.
The power density of lithium cells today is what makes that possible in the first place.
Poverty-homeless people however are a different thing, agreed on that. If you don't have a lockable place to store stuff you might as well have nothing at all...
Got it. I mainly work with people who have severely fallen off the cliff with almost no way to climb back out. I totally see how this new gear could keep someone from reaching a critical breaking point.
Going to college should not be considered moving out. They have moved out only after they have been done with college for at least a year. Until then they are trying to figure out life. Home is still your house, they are just not living there.
Once they are out of college and on their own though they need to figure out what to do about their stuff.
This is a difference in parenting approaches. For our kids, going to college, or in one case the military and another no college, was moving out. You have your approach, we had ours. They were perfectly capable and successful in figuring out their lives without flying back to the nest every summer.
Great that you and your kids had this privilege. A lot of college grads these days struggle to get a job, let alone one that pays enough to rent their own place not one shared with roommates. Honestly, your replies sound very condescending and tone-deaf.
I agree and understand part of what you are saying. I am not exactly sure what the privilege was, but I do understand your observation about the tone-deafness. It is for certain that current job outlook seems bleak and this is extremely difficult. In general, I admit I am very privileged in that I was able to live in a time when certain types of jobs were plentiful and there seemed to be limitless opportunities available to me.
My mom kept most of my books but threw out a rare box of Creative Computing magazines that all the world’s libraries wrongly decided were ephemeral crap.
One problem with what? Also, a problem is not “too much food”. This is an absurd statement. The problem is non nutritive, unhealthy food loaded with calories. Work in any troubled urban center and you will encounter a complete lack of actual grocery stores selling healthy food. Instead you get fast food, bodegas and convenience stores selling low quality, cheap items. We have known of this problem for decades. The poor are poor and certainly don’t have the income for “too much food”.
Cars are plentiful and cheap in America and can be had next to free in many cases. They will be in terrible shape, operated without insurance, registration and driven by someone without a license. They will also be gross polluters but won’t be taken off the street unless there are a series of criminal actions. Many states will only cite and not tow for lack of insurance or a valid license. The chance of getting pulled over is also quite low in many areas due to distribution of police resources. These vehicles are allowed to be parked and serve as shelters in many cities who choose to allow this as a tacit form of shelter. Just look at the transformation of the streets in Seattle, parts of the Bay Area, Los Angeles, and more. This is an ad hoc solution to a situation that can’t be addressed effectively.
My 25-year-old car gets 30+ miles to the gallon, far better than an F-series truck, which is the best selling vehicle in the US.
It's been 30 years since anyone sold a new carbureted production car in the US, for just as long cars have had OBDII, and it's been 50 years since cars were sold without catalytic converters.
There was a time, immediately after those technologies were developed, when older cars polluted significantly more than newer cars, but modern engine designs have been around long enough that cars old enough to be big polluters are expensive collectors pieces.
There may be an occasional car with a blown head gasket or piston ring polluting excessively, but they won't run for long in that condition. Thanks to CAFE standards increasingly limiting the availability of smaller vehicles in the US, the average 20-to-30-year-old gasoline engine probably pollutes less per mile than the average 0-to-5-year-old gasoline engine.
Not really. While it's true that CAFE standards have lead to bigger vehicles, average to average, the newer vehicle pollutes less. Yes if you compare a 2001 Honda Civic to a 2024 Chevy Suburban, the Honda wins, but 20-30 years old puts you around the year 2000, during which the pollution standards on cars was much more lax than they are today.
It is not even the cost of the car, but the upkeep. In large European cities parking alone can be prohibitive. In Sweden cars older than 2006 pay extra tax because they don't have emissions testing data.
In the US car taxes are based on value. Where I live once a car is 10 years old the tax is $50/year. Buy a cheap car for $5000, pay $1000/year to insure it, and $50/year for a license and it is fully legal. You still have to pay for fuel, but that is fairly cheap. You also have maintenance expenses, but generally the poor have a network of mechanics to do the labor for free (in exchange for your labor for something else). Even if you buy a different car every year, you will be hard pressed to find an apartment for $6000/year.
Downtown in US cities parking is prohibitive, but that is only a small part of the city. Most of the city you can park for free. You want to move the car every day just so it doesn't look abandoned, but otherwise this is a cheap way to live and you get transportation as a bonus.
In Sweden large cities even in the suburbs parking can be quite expensive. But I guess it is because "the big city suburbs" in Sweden are still mostly 4-6 story tall apartments.
At my current place (apartment in a suburb about 10km from the city center) our parking would cost ~180 USD per month. From a tech worker perspective it is not like unaffordable, but definetily a luxury for most of the population. The median after-tax income in Sweden is like 3k USD.
That tax I mentioned before also makes very old beat-up cars not worth keeping (which is the intent of the tax to be fair).
One of the main upsides of living in a detached house in Sweden is not having to pay for parking. But even so the increase heating bills in winter can easily cost more than a car installment depending on your HVAC and insulation.
The issue in America is that you can own a car, not pay for upkeep, not pay registration, not pay for insurance, not pay to park and still drive it many times without consequence.
"Cars are plentiful and cheap in America and can be had next to free in many cases." What is the buzzword bingo and what is my bent?
I think it should be permissible to allow some dude to live out of a 2002 Town and Country that parks at a revolving series of strip mall. I currently work with several people who use a similar method to keep themselves and their kids off the streets.
The phrasing might be bad in that I was pointing out the overall bleakness of the overall situation; no insurance, no registration, no maintenance, but the intent was to show that they are teetering on the brink of falling into an abyss that is very difficult to come out of, not that they were some sort of anonymous nebulous mass.
The main thing I have been struggling with personally with working with this issue (housing, addiction) over 25 years is that it is such a huge, seemingly unsolvable problem that no one is able to address systematically and when I think about the big picture I feel overwhelming helplessness, but find hope working in much more local situations.
The car comment was just an observation to the parent comment, with some additional commentary on how it isn't at all a big luxury, rather a bleak situation where the car owner is in a very precarious situation. Reading it now, I do see how it could be misconstrued as some sort of zealotry of people of a certain bent, but I think I am might be bent the opposite way of what you think!
>"Cars are plentiful and cheap in America and can be had next to free in many cases." What is the buzzword bingo and what is my bent?
The entire sentence after that came across like a giant dog whistle for the kind of people who are never out of arms reach of their clutching pearls. The only word you missed was "blight". I was expecting it to be followed by a call for some sort of government action.
Might just be a reflection of the language of whoever your social circle is but it came across real Karen-ey
Interesting and useful. I would welcome societal action and have no faith the government can do anything at all given the government has no idea what to act on. I have seen the “government” wage a war on drugs, allow encampments to sprawl only to bulldoze them later, allow cars and RVs to serve as ad hoc housing only to tow them away, provide injection sites only to close them down, etc. Whatever the government does it reverses itself and we can’t seem to make progress.
I’ll use the word though; our inability to provide housing and basic essential services to our fellow human beings is a blight.
As someone who has worked directly with these people in Los Angeles and Seattle, I tend to focus locally, otherwise the enormity of the situation is overwhelming and fills me with despair.
When you say “we need to fix this” no one can agree what “this” is. There is no one “this” and it becomes a morass of generational systemic issues, localized problems, competing views on economics, morality, government and more. It reminds me of when tech people show up to “fix” education. It just isn’t a single issue.
I agree we need to fix something, but as soon as I think about the big picture it feels futile and I have been involved in efforts for decades.
>I agree we need to fix something, but as soon as I think about the big picture it feels....
Yes, "fix" is a weaselly word, and 'futility' might be more appropriate if the subject has similar etiology to many of our other problems here.
At minimum, tolerance is due to the ones not causing significant problems. In my opinion, a substantial portion of the US will experience homelessness in the near future, but that won't discuss well around here. And note, I am from Florida. The East Coast version is quite different, as well as most of the median state situation. Very different. Especially in places where drugs are not the impetus.
With your experience in this space, are you able to provide some pointers for how to get involved in a productive manner?
The housing problem feels so daunting that I struggle to understand how one could help move the needle. Knowing which organizations to volunteer with or places to donate that actually improve the situation would be a helpful start.
When I lived in downtown Los Angeles, I volunteered at the Midnight Mission and various veterans organizations dealing with addiction and homelessness.
Only you can really define what is productive to you, but people are always needed for running the shelters, working in the kitchens and more. It isn't glamorous at all.
People need to be transported from one facility to another, to medical appointments, to court, to counseling and more.
I currently work with youth at risk, helping them finish their high school degrees and families who are right at the brink of falling into serious problems.
I can't really tell you which organizations to volunteer, as there is a spectrum of them; some are religious like the Salvation Army and some have social and political agendas that may not align with you. Without recommending or condemning, for example, you will find organizations who work with pregnant teens who are anti-abortion. This may not be for you. The same goes for sexual and gender identity issues.
One thing that seems very unpolitical to me, and it is how I started, was volunteering at a local shelter. If you have more affinity with helping women, there are shelters that deal with them. If you have more affinity with dealing with people with addiction issues, there are shelters dealing with them.
Because of my background in the military, education and addiction, I find affinity working with veterans, addicts and at risk youth.
The problem is daunting, and the needle feels unmovable most of the time. In the big scheme of things I feel powerless, but I know reducing local misery is possible and is something I can help with.
It is sad, and as one of the several former BeOS employees who went to Apple to add our experience to OSX, I can say that most of us have moved on. This isn't to say that others can't do what we did; they certainly should be able to. The OSX team back then was much smaller and we all had a maniacal attention to detail. One reason is that we were micromanaged by Steve J. and did lengthy weekly reviews with him and he was direct and brutal. He wasn't always right, but he did have the final say. This is all gone and even though Steve Lemay (now head of UX) was there during this time, he was also present during the overall rot of the user experience.
/meta let me just say how cool it is to cool it is to make a comment on HN and have responses from folks who worked on legendary teams. Thanks for your work on BeOS.
Yes I think that's the guy. He did a talk at an Apple developer event when they released the initial APFS all those years ago after HFS and HFS+ were deprecated. Seems like only yesterday.
Now that we are living in The Future, I am dumbfounded how e.g. dynamically populated lists change their content reliably to something I did not want, during the phase of interaction where my finger is descending onto the target. Click! Not what I want.
Feels like a lost art which will be "discovered" again in the next 15 years.
I am now eyeing my dishwasher very suspiciously.
reply