4 ms·

I find this to be a really ungenerous take. Nobody is claiming that they live in a non-industrial society. They clearly live on a fibreglass sailing vessel and

I find this to be a really ungenerous take. Nobody is claiming that they live in a non-industrial society. They clearly live on a fibreglass sailing vessel and use electronic navigation aides. The "narrative", as you put it, is simply to use less, to "double your capacity by halving your consumption", to live life in a humble and sustainable way, and to do as much as you can with what you already have. I found the entire website to have a dreamy and non-judgemental approach to everything, and I envy their lifestyle. They are just doing what they do, and documenting it so that others can learn with them, and maybe to encourage us to aspire to do a little better with our lives. Maybe you could avoid judging them, in return?

rgrieselhuber 5y ago
I'm always mystified by the animosity I see toward anything resembling decentralization on HN, despite the fact that it is a forum populated by Computer Scientists who are very well aware of the benefits of decentralization when it comes to computer systems.
alar44 5y ago
I think it's a bit of a paradox. If everyone lived like that, no one would be able to live like that. "All I need is a battery, a solar panel, copper wiring encased in plastic, a mining company to dig the ore out, a chemical refinery to help refine the ore, an oil rig, a team to run it, a chemistry lab to make the plastic, a small town to create this portable computer for me..."
- jefurii 5y ago
  So these people are trying to do some good, and your criticism of them is that they're not perfect? Tell me how much good are you doing? It's not possible to live completely off the grid. Is that a reason not to try at all?
  - alar44 5y ago
    Perfect? Perfectly what? How much good am I doing? I don't know that you're talking about, sorry.
- mediocregopher 5y ago
  > I think it's a bit of a paradox. If everyone lived like that, no one would be able to live like that. Is it unthinkable for someone to leave their humble dwelling, with few amenities, and head down to a factory where these amenities are built? Just because we don't use a particular technology at home doesn't mean we can't do so in a factory. Put another way, there's very little about most people's home lifestyle which directly begets a microprocessor, and yet microprocessors are still made.
  - alar44 5y ago
    Microprocessors are made because people collectively contribute to "the grid". The ability to live off "the grid" is made possible by "the grid" itself. Unless you are building tools from raw materials. Going out and buying a bunch of modern technology made by the grid to live off of it is kind of ironic. Fine by me but I get parent's point. There's something a bit privileged about it.
    - ryandrake 5y ago
      I agree with you and OP. Are you really going “off grid” if, to do so, you are reliant on all these things only made on the grid? I mean, even the Amish are not “off grid” if you look at their supply chain. I’m not going to be the guy who gatekeeps the phrase, but it is definitely ironic the way people use it.
      - doctor_eval 5y ago
        But you are gatekeeping the phrase, to the point of taking the term so literally that it becomes devoid of meaning. To me, “off grid” simply means being entirely self reliant for all aspects of your well-being, for a period of time. Bobbing around in a tiny plastic boat in the middle of the enormous Pacific Ocean with literally no possibility of connection to any other human is just about as off grid as you can get on this Earth. Just because they reconnect to the grid occasionally to top up and download, doesn’t invalidate this. The truth remains that they are “on-grid” far less than most of us.
      - 5y ago
- doctor_eval 5y ago
  There's no paradox, because nobody is being directed to live "like that". It's a story of some people's life that some of us find interesting, not a manifesto, nor a demand that others like they do.
kortilla 5y ago
Is it sustainable to give everyone a boat and all of that stuff though? Is this really any different from a walk through of a big off grid estate with rain collection, batteries, solar, chickens, grains, etc? Just because there is a nice closed loop on day to day resource usage, it doesn’t make something sustainable nor something to strive for to help with climate change.
- deleted 5y ago
  [deleted]
16012022 5y ago

rgrieselhuber 5y ago

I'm always mystified by the animosity I see toward anything resembling decentralization on HN, despite the fact that it is a forum populated by Computer Scientists who are very well aware of the benefits of decentralization when it comes to computer systems.

alar44 5y ago

I think it's a bit of a paradox. If everyone lived like that, no one would be able to live like that. "All I need is a battery, a solar panel, copper wiring encased in plastic, a mining company to dig the ore out, a chemical refinery to help refine the ore, an oil rig, a team to run it, a chemistry lab to make the plastic, a small town to create this portable computer for me..."

jefurii 5y ago
So these people are trying to do some good, and your criticism of them is that they're not perfect? Tell me how much good are you doing? It's not possible to live completely off the grid. Is that a reason not to try at all?
- alar44 5y ago
  Perfect? Perfectly what? How much good am I doing? I don't know that you're talking about, sorry.
mediocregopher 5y ago
> I think it's a bit of a paradox. If everyone lived like that, no one would be able to live like that. Is it unthinkable for someone to leave their humble dwelling, with few amenities, and head down to a factory where these amenities are built? Just because we don't use a particular technology at home doesn't mean we can't do so in a factory. Put another way, there's very little about most people's home lifestyle which directly begets a microprocessor, and yet microprocessors are still made.
- alar44 5y ago
  Microprocessors are made because people collectively contribute to "the grid". The ability to live off "the grid" is made possible by "the grid" itself. Unless you are building tools from raw materials. Going out and buying a bunch of modern technology made by the grid to live off of it is kind of ironic. Fine by me but I get parent's point. There's something a bit privileged about it.
  - ryandrake 5y ago
    I agree with you and OP. Are you really going “off grid” if, to do so, you are reliant on all these things only made on the grid? I mean, even the Amish are not “off grid” if you look at their supply chain. I’m not going to be the guy who gatekeeps the phrase, but it is definitely ironic the way people use it.
    - doctor_eval 5y ago
      But you are gatekeeping the phrase, to the point of taking the term so literally that it becomes devoid of meaning. To me, “off grid” simply means being entirely self reliant for all aspects of your well-being, for a period of time. Bobbing around in a tiny plastic boat in the middle of the enormous Pacific Ocean with literally no possibility of connection to any other human is just about as off grid as you can get on this Earth. Just because they reconnect to the grid occasionally to top up and download, doesn’t invalidate this. The truth remains that they are “on-grid” far less than most of us.
    - 5y ago
doctor_eval 5y ago
There's no paradox, because nobody is being directed to live "like that". It's a story of some people's life that some of us find interesting, not a manifesto, nor a demand that others like they do.

kortilla 5y ago

Is it sustainable to give everyone a boat and all of that stuff though? Is this really any different from a walk through of a big off grid estate with rain collection, batteries, solar, chickens, grains, etc? Just because there is a nice closed loop on day to day resource usage, it doesn’t make something sustainable nor something to strive for to help with climate change.

deleted 5y ago
[deleted]

16012022 5y ago