13 ms·

Extreme Minimalism: this guy owns just 15 things

184 points by wgx 15y ago

nodata 15y ago
I'd like to know how many things he has on that Macbook air.
- goo 15y ago
  You might be surprised -- a minimalist mindset can extend toward computer habits as well. Also, just as he relies on society to provide him with essentials like food, so too could he rely on cloud providers like Google Docs to take care of his document storage -- though of course he would still own his Google account. It's no stretch to compare Mimimalism to a thin-client computing design -- it is made possible by the existence of an excellent network of other person-nodes, and it reduces the emotional and physical "computational" overhead of owning things. Also, in response to come other comments in this thread: to argue that he is parasitic requires the moral stance that using things you do not own is parasitic, regardless of the other contributions you make to society (including paying for the temporary use of those things!). Which is bollocks.
jpiasetz 15y ago
It's always interesting how people define what is a thing. He's got a good definition but he should take it a step further. Expand it to anything that you have that you would feel bad if you had to replace. The digital clutter weights on your mind just like physical objects (files on the macbook, email in gmail, all of it). Also although he list the items that he'd be pissed if he lost he'd probably be a lot less angry them a lot of people if he was robbed. Simpler and cheaper to only have to replace 15 items.
epo 15y ago
I had a boss once who went on at great length about the benefits of the paperless office. His office was indeed devoid of paper storage, his secretary's office however, had loads of filing cabinets stuffed full of papers. Self-regarding parasites like this just offload all their support systems onto other people and then brag about how minimal and self sufficient they are.
- waitwhat 15y ago
  Mr. Hyde [...] is currently homeless I don’t have a permanent address Alex Hillman let me crash on his couch So basically: Homeless man has few possessions.
  - DanBC 15y ago
    ...and is lucky that he know people who do have houses, and houses big enough (with couches) who let him stay.
    - matwood 15y ago
      ...and TVs for him to watch, food for him to eat, coffee makers for him to use... Years ago I was pretty minimalist. I didn't want to own anything that I couldn't walk away from. So in my apartment I had a bed, a computer, a small TV, a surfboard, and a couple of plastic deck chairs to sit on. Today I have quite a few more things in my house but my attitude towards what I own is still the same. That I think is what is important.
    - drumdance 15y ago
      Yeah. Blind, random luck. It's not like he spent years building relationships with people and becoming the kind of guy that people like to have as a house guest.
- ap22213 15y ago
  So, perhaps you are against self-regarding people and braggarts and not necessarily minimalism? There's no such thing as being self-sufficient. But, having ditched 90% of my possessions over the years, I have to say that removing all that material burden has felt damn great. One of the best things I've ever done.
- nhangen 15y ago
  That's exactly it - many 'minimalists' I know live just like this, but never have any money, always need a place to stay or a ride, never want to chip in at the nice restaurants because of point #1, and make it extremely uncomfortable for the rest of us 'consumerists.' I get it, having less can be good, but not at the cost of friendships and a healthy lifestyle. Oh, and did I mention that many of these clothing items, which get re-used often, get nasty fast.
jister 15y ago
Balance. An extreme of "something" is not good...
- koningrobot 15y ago
  What do you mean by "balance"? Is it that which you and the culture that conditioned you would consider "normal"?
  - danieldk 15y ago
    That's a good question. But such things go together with a certain lifestyle. For example, when you start having children, it becomes terribly hard to have such a lifestyle. Not only do they need toys and more clothes. But you will require a bigger house, a bigger house goes together with tools for fix stuff, etc. The question is whether you should define minimalism quantitatively or qualitatively. Isn't minimalism to buy what you need to lead a reasonable life, rather than a race to have the lowers number of possessions? The minimum number depends on so many factors: family size, illnesses, hobbies (some people require only a GPS for hiking, others need a climbing gear), etc.
- VonLipwig 15y ago
  How extreme is it really? The guy has 15 things with resale value that he treasures. How many things to do you own that you use day in, day out that you treasure. For me, discarding kitchen things and stuff needed to run a house (furniture, hoover, ironing board etc) I use / wear maybe 25 things frequently. The main difference between that guy and most people is he chooses to sell / discard / not buy crap he doesn't need. Most people accumulate stuff and fill their attic with it.
- gizmo 15y ago
  I consider it a good thing when a person is extremely reasonable. Or extremely thoughtful. Or extremely honest. Or extremely patient. Or extremely gracious. We don't need balance in all things. A rocket only makes it safely to the moon if the engineers are extremely cautious. Bill Gates is extremely charitable. Einstein was extremely intelligent. The idea that "extreme X for any X" is bad is some sort of pseudo-wisdom that doesn't even pass the sniff test.
kennywinker 15y ago
Headline: guy owns 15 things ... read article, guy owns more than 15 things. New headling: "Guy reaches new heights of extreme minimalism by ignoring a bunch of the things that he owns". But I guess it was a minimalist headline, so that was too long...?
- nodata 15y ago
  Laptop charger, phone charger, money to own washing powder to wash clothes. "Toiletry kit" is a cheat, so add: razor, shaving foam, blades, toothpaste, toothbrush, towel, shampoo, shower gel, etc. etc. etc.
  - JamesNK 15y ago
    It may not be physical but he has a blog, that's a thing. Email address, tumbler account, Flicker account, etc, etc.
    - SquareWheel 15y ago
      I'd disagree, simply because you could take that to the extreme. Does he own the water he drinks, the air he breathes, the life he lives through? As far as I can see, we're talking strictly in physical items.
      - nodata 15y ago
        Then let's talk about items that were once physical. He owns some music. He owns some movies. He owns lots of documents. et cetera.
        SquareWheel 15y ago
        We can take that further. If clumps of data that make up a "file" is a possession, what about the thousands of executable and library files that make up his operating system? He may not use the calculator or chess game, but his computer surely comes with that. What about every bit that make those up? We need a clear line or this gets silly, and I think physical possessions is a clear enough line.
michael_dorfman 15y ago
Most Buddhist monks could easily get under the "15 things" limit-- the standard list of possessions is: three robes, an alms bowl, a cloth belt, a needle and thread, a razor for shaving the head, and a water filter.
- ramblerman 15y ago
  And a dog just needs a stick. I don't think it's about competition.
- kahawe 15y ago
  Also, they have all other things provided for them without actually owning them.
- its_so_on 15y ago
  that's pretty good. source? with a wish-list like that what do they need alms for? I couldn't live without a toothbrush though.
  - jff 15y ago
    The money they are given probably helps buy food, since not even the magical Buddhist monks can survive without at least a little rice.
    - wollw 15y ago
      Actually, according to the Buddhist monastic code they aren't allowed to have money. I know a very large number (probably the majority) of monks these days do accept money but I know of and have lived with those that don't. In the communities that respect the Vinaya[1] there are 227 rules that fully ordained monks are supposed to follow. Novices have ten rules[2] and one of them is not to handle money. [1]http://www.accesstoinsight.org/lib/authors/thanissaro/bmc1/bmc1.intro.html http://www.accesstoinsight.org/lib/authors/thanissaro/bmc1/b... [2]http://www.accesstoinsight.org/ptf/dhamma/sila/dasasila.html http://www.accesstoinsight.org/ptf/dhamma/sila/dasasila.html
agumonkey 15y ago
Next step, extrem bootstraping, define the kernel to rebuild everything you need. Living From Scratch v1
skbohra123 15y ago
That's actually more stuff than most of the middle class Indians have. Hmmm
- sopooneo 15y ago
  Maybe more retail value, but as for number of items? I believe a typical middle class Indian has a lot more.
mmahemoff 15y ago
See also: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Digital_nomad http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Digital_nomad
- nickpinkston 15y ago
  http://www.thrillingheroics.com/digital-nomad-academy-–-were-doing-it http://www.thrillingheroics.com/digital-nomad-academy-–-were... Neat site about Digital Nomadist, and an article on the Academy for it.
DanBC 15y ago
Curious that he doesn't mention "big bank balance" which makes life a lot more comfortable for him. He needs food? He buys food. He needs emergency accommodation? (Because his friend's house burns down or some such) He can buy that accommodation for the nights he needs it. Having just become homeless[1] myself (not through choice) I've whittled down my possessions to something that's easy to carry. Following his rules (stuff that'd be annoying to buy again) I have a computer; a games console; an mp3 player; some headphones; a kindle; one pair trousers. I have more clothes, but they're easy to replace. The Kindle is odd - one item, with many books on it. But they are easy to replace. Personally, I think that's a flaw in his method. By a more reasonable counting system I have money (not much, but much more than other people in similar situations in my country, and very very much more than people in other countries); I have the gadgets (and associated chargers / headphones / cases / bags / media / software); I have clothes. [1] As I've mentioned it, take a look at this website. (http://gloshomeseeker.co.uk http://gloshomeseeker.co.uk) It's aimed at people needing "social housing". (I don't; I have no idea why I was given that URL, maybe it's just the script they follow.) IT IS AN APPALLING WEBSITE, AND A DREADFUL FORM. From the broken security mixing secure and insecure stuff, to the weird form flow.
- mgkimsal 15y ago
  ... to the 420k image of a 306k document. Firebug shows it as 1.1m, but headers say 420k. Oh, and the image is 'no-cache' so it'll reload on every page request from a server apparently running on a 64k ISDN line. Yes, that's a pretty bad site. :/
- rufibarbatus 15y ago
  I'm not sure if Mr Hyde's definition of a personal possession was a (well-played) PR trick or simply a certain lack of accounting intuition. Which is a shame, because his putative balance sheet should be a fascinating thing to think about. If we were to take a look at his assets and guess reasonable values for each category of asset, I wouldn't be surprised if all 15 items he listed (give or take his wallet and computer) ended up in a catch-all 1%-of-total-value "other assets" category. In reality, Mr Hyde's own description of how he lives (and how he manages to get around with so few 'objects') suggests that the most valuable things he has, by far, are (and probably in that order): his contacts, his reputation, and his cash. Close to these three, his clothes, iPod and sneakers, however annoying to replace he imagines them to be, should be next to meaningless.
personlurking 15y ago
If he can group things together like his 'toiletry kit', then I'll do the same with my clothes (though I have toiletries, too). Aside from my clothes, I have 10 books, a laptop and a cell phone. If we're going off of things I'd be pissed if someone stole then that'd be my MBA and all of my clothes...so I guess I kind of own two things. I've lived like this for 10 years.
deleted 15y ago
[deleted]
pistoriusp 15y ago
If he didn't have friends or family willing to give him a place to stay then he would have to increase the number of things that he owned. Which isn't a bad thing. Certain objects are worthwhile owning. I'm particularly fond of robots which decrease my need to do menial labour. My washing machine and dishwasher saves me at least 30 minutes a day.
Alexx 15y ago
Minimalism and 'getting rid of your possessions' has been one of those hot internet topics for as long as I can remember. The trend I notice is that the articles preaching the extreme end of this are almost always written by 20-something bloggers who are so much happier now they're couch surfing the world care free rather than 'working 9-5 to pay for that TV'. Obviously, there is a large truth in there. We all take only a few things on holiday with us and enjoy it. But sleeping on other peoples couches, using their kitchens, bathrooms and towels, and freelancing to get some money to your paypal account now and then isn't a particularly sustainable lifestyle. I suspect if you came back in 10 years you'll see a different picture. If you want to think about having children or living a generally western lifestyle as opposed to a '3rd world' or really homeless lifestyle then there's a sensible balance point. I believe rejecting materialism is about giving your energy, focus and love to your passions, your family, and enjoying the experiences life gives you over material things. Not blindly aiming to own 10 or 20 objects while you're basically renting or borrowing everything else to keep living in a western style. All things in moderation :)
- kahawe 15y ago
  Also, in 10 years you are 10 years behind on working experience and have a big hole on your CV with nothing much to show for but a couple of blog entries and tons of pictures. And I couldn't agree more with your last paragraph.
- gldalmaso 15y ago
  >> Not blindly aiming to own 10 or 20 objects That is the essence of what is really wrong with this effort. By focusing so much on living with just a few items, your life is still being ruled by materialism, just in a different end of the spectrum. Someone mentioned monks, so take their teaching and aim for the middle road.
- georgieporgie 15y ago
  I suspect if you came back in 10 years you'll see a different picture. If you want to think about having children or living a generally western lifestyle as opposed to a '3rd world' or really homeless lifestyle then there's a sensible balance point. There's no reason he couldn't continue to live a substantially minimalist lifestyle while adding a family. He could migrate into living on a sailboat, RV, or in a home considered tiny by Western (American, particularly) standards.
jiggy2011 15y ago
I also own practically nothing apart from my clothes (all bought at discount stores) and the food in my fridge. All my tech needs are met by work , my furniture came with my (rented) house and my TV etc are mostly other peoples cast offs.
- jarek 15y ago
  Just because you didn't pay for your TV doesn't mean you don't own it.
fauigerzigerk 15y ago
My own experience from living out of a max 20kg suitcase is that owning too few things forces you to think about things a lot more than you would like to. Do I keep this? What do I throw away instead? Where do I get this quickly if such and such event occurs? What's the cost of buying this versus keeping/transporting it. Who can I borrow this from? Am I bothering them too much if I borrow this again? Etc, etc. My conclusion is that owning too much stuff increases complexity, but owning too little does too and it can be very expensive.
- zerostar07 15y ago
  Agree. I think the key idea is to minimize the time it takes to think about the things you own.
jodrellblank 15y ago
Bit of a success for Apple that this guy pared his life down to 15 things and 2 of them are Apple products.
- tambourine_man 15y ago
  Not only that, but all his consumer electronics are made by them. Heck, almost everything not wearable or clothe related is Apple's.
ck2 15y ago
When you go to starbucks each morning, spending $100 a month there instead of owning your own coffeemaker - it's not minimalism. It's consumerism. Trying living with just what he has in a 3rd world country and it's minimalism.
- deleted 15y ago
  [deleted]
- ctdonath 15y ago
  If, by leveraging Starbucks convenience, he can save/make more than $100/mo then it is minimalism. High mobility comes to mind; a traveling consultant might not be home enough to warrant owning a coffeemaker, and [in]convenience of a portable set (AeroPress + Hairo MiniMill) may be problematic. While minimalism and survivalism have a great deal in common, they are not equals. Try living in a city with what a 3rd worlder does and it's a punishable offense (possession/use of large knife, firestarter, chickens, etc.).
- readme 15y ago
  Starbucks does add up, but I would say that it is minimalism (Especially if you are using it as an office) From an individual's perspective, it is not minimalist, because now you will need to have an entire coffee shop in your life to obtain coffee. However, from a societal viewpoint, it is very minimalist, because now each person can share the means to produce coffee, thus consuming less: electricity, water (assuming most dump some out), coffee supplies/coffee, and coffee brewing equipment (really, we don't all need our own machine... well, I do. but that's why I am a capitalist)
  - Retric 15y ago
    I think just printing a receipt for each cup makes the whole process less efficient for society. Let alone disposable cups etc.
    - ctdonath 15y ago
      Starbucks doesn't print a receipt unless you want one, and you are welcome to bring & fill your own mug there. You can even use your smartphone to pay.
waitwhat 15y ago
There is also the hipster version of this: http://theburninghouse.com/ http://theburninghouse.com/ "If your house was burning, what would you take with you? It's a conflict between what's practical, valuable and sentimental."
- arethuza 15y ago
  If our home was burning the only things I'd be bothered about getting to safety would by my wife and son, then our cats. Nothing else matters in that context.
  - paisible 15y ago
    how right you are !
  - Retric 15y ago
    It's situational. Outside of a major emergency, taking an extra 15 seconds to get your cellphone, wallet, and key's would probably would probably be worth it, come home and your house is on fire just let it burn. Also, as long as the fire is contained in a single room simply closing the door can do a lot to save your home.
- run4yourlives 15y ago
  This website makes me sad for our species. Somebody thinks "Rolling Stone" is essential.
ffffruit 15y ago
I remember reading somewhere that S. Jobs was of a similar mentality; at times he only kept a Tiffany's lamp, a chair and a bed in this apartment.
DanBC 15y ago
Does he have health insurance? I'm guessing that's a pretty big thing.
TomAnthony 15y ago
There are a bunch of comments that this guy actually owns more than 15 things, and that others cope with less, and he isn't in the 3rd world etc. All true; his system isn't as extreme as the headline would have you believe. However, I see the takeaway is that he gets by with a lot less stuff than the average person in his demographic, and I think that is something to be applauded. I know I wouldn't relish doing it like he has, but it has made me think I could get by with less.
- Avshalom 15y ago
  That he doesn't actually seem to get by with less is people's problem. He's essentially just renting everything, very inefficiently at that. It's ridiculous to applaud the idea -of buying coffee at a restaurant every day instead of owning a coffee maker- as "doing with less"
  - mechanical_fish 15y ago
    Not ridiculous at all, in context. It's all about marginal costs. If owning something would require you to rent a room that you might otherwise not have to rent, its marginal cost could be hundreds of dollars per month. There are portable coffeemakers for backpackers, but there's no such thing as lightweight portable coffee beans, and buying coffee beans in one-cup units on an as-needed basis is pretty expensive, in time if nothing else. As for whether traveling constantly and renting all your stuff is "inefficient": Well, sure. But to be alive is to be inefficient. Dead people are maximally efficient. But they also aren't having any fun. There's no prize for having lots of leftover money when you're dead. As they say, you can't take it with you.
- anamax 15y ago
  > However, I see the takeaway is that he gets by with a lot less stuff than the average person in his demographic Except that he doesn't. He merely doesn't own the stuff that he uses/consumes.
  - TomAnthony 15y ago
vae77 15y ago
In terms of software... very bloated.
- nandemo 15y ago
  Indeed. If you own a device running a modern processor and OS, you got extreme miniaturization hiding in (skimpy) minimalism's clothes. A sheepherder in Afghanistan might own a hundred items more than this guy, yet he lives a simpler life by any reasonable definition.
giddas 15y ago
Amazing how offended some people seem to be by him omitting a few thing - who really cares
- kahawe 15y ago
  > Amazing how offended some people seem to be by him omitting a few thing - who really cares If I promise to give you 50 bucks for some software you wrote and then I only give you 10, you wouldn't be offended or complain, right?
  - RodgerTheGreat 15y ago
    Perhaps a closer analogy would be "If I was playing golf with you and I took 6 strokes for a hole, would you be offended if I called that a hole-in-one?"
  - drumdance 15y ago
    Seriously? Clicking on a link with a vaguely misleading headline is the same as giving someone $50? Really?
    - kahawe 15y ago
      I was promised something by the (outrageously) surprising claim in the headline and the article could not remotely keep up... and this was the first analogy that came to my mind - in both cases something was promised but then not fulfilled.
- andrewhyde 15y ago
  I am constantly amazed with a) peoples obsessions with underwear and b) how really bent up people get over a number being 16 instead of 15. I said somewhere in the comments that I was disqualified for the minimalist Olympics... Hello from Colorado!
rkudeshi 15y ago
If you happen to be interested in more "minimalist porn", I too made a list of the things I was living with at one point last year. http://raviudeshi.com/2011/02/75-things http://raviudeshi.com/2011/02/75-things With hindsight, I can say it's not at all about the number, but more the mentality. I don't know about this guy, but so long as you find a hostel/apartment/friend with some basic cooking utensils and Internet, it's not too hard to keep your costs very low.
- kahawe 15y ago
  > but so long as you find a hostel/apartment/friend with some basic cooking utensils and Internet, it's not too hard to keep your costs very low. Sorry to be nitpicking here, that "minimalism porn" thing is a completely new curiosity for me, but technically you just shift ownership and costs (by mooching) but you still take advantage of those things or services - which really isn't all that minimalistic at all.
  - arethuza 15y ago
    If the 15 things were meant to keep you alive in a wilderness area for a couple of months then I'd find the whole thing a lot more interesting - living "minimally" in an urban environment with a healthy bank balance doesn't seem that much of a challenge.
    - dirtyaura 15y ago
      I don't think people are after "a challenge" with this minimalist urban life style. It just feels good to be free of stuff. At least for me it was one of the greatest periods of my life. Around 10 years ago, after a breakup with a girl I was living with, I got rid of most of my stuff, mainly kept a few clothes and things that I couldn't replace somehow like letters from my friends and photographs. But furniture, utensils, books, CDs, vinyls, all that I sold to thrift stores. The feeling was awesome, being free from stuff and relationship. There was nothing challenging living that way. Only challenge was a decision to get rid of stuff (and her).
dimitar 15y ago
Minimalism - asceticism for rich people? Did I get it?
gbog 15y ago
This guy still owns too much. When I was in Nepal with a friend studying migration, we saw many guys wlaking to India with: Their clothes (2 pieces) Their plastic slippers A cloth bag with, inside: One toothbrush A few rupies.
- ctdonath 15y ago
  Whenever preparing to travel, I always try to allay my wife's "maybe I forgot something!" fears by asking "got passport? credit card? yes? then we're ready to go." My personal version: knife, firestarter, meds http://db.tt/rU56upUK http://db.tt/rU56upUK
powertower 15y ago
This reminds me of an old joke: What do you call a man with no material possessions? A man without a girlfriend.
- zeteo 15y ago
  > What do you call a man with no material possessions? Recently divorced.
bane 15y ago
My wife and I were were struck by something recently while standing at the checkout line at a Nike store, looking at a display case full of specialized, expensive, pedometers. Not a one was a useful as the jogging app I have on my phone. And when we're out jogging, I listen to music, or streaming radio...on my phone. And oh yeah, if it's late and I'm going through the local woods, my phone has an app that turns it into a flashlight. And now suddenly a bit of enlightenment hit us. A modern smartphone replaces a great many discrete devices that we used to have to carry around, or at least store someplace: Common uses for our phones: 1) A portable phone 2) A small portable computer 3) An address book (yes, I used to carry one around with my old non-smart phone) 4) A map book 5) A GPS 6) An mp3/music player 7) A radio (fm tuner, but more importantly streaming radio, flipping through global stations on my phone reminded my of being 9 with a shortwave receiver and picking up broadcasts of Voice of America going into Europe) 8) A flashlight 9) A pedometer 10) A portable book (actually a library) 11) A thumb drive 12) A portable translator 13) A portable gaming device 14) A camera 15) A videocamera 16) Alarm clock 17) Portable calculator 18) Barcode scanner 19) A wifi signal scanner 20) Portable movie player 21) Starbucks card And a few others... And suddenly all that junk is in one device, a backpack full of stuff. Coming up this year they're going to be useful as credit cards, business cards, some have projectors on them, better optics and I can junk my binoculars, a decent way to hook up a keyboard and monitor (it can already act as it's own trackpad, oh I forgot to mention that, I can use it as a trackpad on my computer) and I can junk my laptop for 85% of what I do. These aren't phones, these are some kind of sci-fi multi-tool. We're ending up in a measure of minimalism de facto just by having more versatile stuff. So yeah, looking around my house, I could probably ditch a ton of stuff (I mean literally, I have several full bookshelves I could potentially replace) and not miss it.
- mahyarm 15y ago
  A portable monitor, keyboard and battery for that monitor will take about as much space and weight as an ultrabook anyway. You'll probably shave off a pound & half an inch and get similar battery life at most. The closest thing I can think of that would be as portable as a phone would be something like a laser keyboard and a mini projector built into one.
deleted 15y ago
[deleted]
keiferski 15y ago
Having been a "minimalism-addict", I've come to the conclusion that the best part is the act of getting rid of things, not the act of having few things. Getting rid of junk is liberating; living with 15 things is just a pain in the ass.
- engblaze 15y ago
  Absolutely... the spirit of reducing waste and consumerism is admirable, but this guy is being ridiculous by claiming that he only owns "15 things". Not only is he missing the point, but his hyperbole is out of control. A toiletry kit is 1 item? Right. Bike Snob NYC has a hilarious post on Hyde if you haven't seen it: http://bikesnobnyc.blogspot.com/2011/05/paring-down-and-pairing-up-its-not-size.html http://bikesnobnyc.blogspot.com/2011/05/paring-down-and-pair...
  - dpark 15y ago
    > A toiletry kit is 1 item? Right. Pft. I only own one item. A house. In fact, I'm married, so I really own half an item. Pretty minimalist, right?
  - atourgates 15y ago
    Ahh yes, I wondered if this was the same gentlemen who was the subject of so much fantastic BSNYC lampooning earlier this year. It's worth noting that he hasn't stopped. http://bikesnobnyc.blogspot.com/2011/12/2011-year-walls-kept-closing-in.html http://bikesnobnyc.blogspot.com/2011/12/2011-year-walls-kept... is quite excellent, with such lines as, "So, being the good minimalist that he is, he immediately paid way too much for almost nothing." I think the truth is somewhere between the two hyperboles. Gram Hill's minimalism as an overriding cause is taken to completely silly extremes. However, the principle of getting rid of shit you don't need (and better yet, not buying shit you don't need in the first place) is quite sound.
  - mechanical_fish 15y ago
    Actually, the OP provides a fairly insightful definition of "item": I count my things as resellable items I would be pissed if someone took. By this definition an "item" is "one emotional connection to an object", not merely an object itself. Yes, this means that the guy carries around many more physical objects than he counts as "items". This seems emotionally healthy, though, if one can afford it. And affording it is easier than ever: This is not the 18th century, and underwear is so cheap that, were a pair to be stolen, you're out the cost of a cup of coffee. (By his own definition, I wonder whether the OP really "owns" a toiletry kit. Even a moderately fancy toiletry kit is worth maybe twenty bucks and can be replaced in ten minutes at any drugstore. And they're certainly not resellable. So I tend to suspect the OP's toiletry kit appears in this list mainly for branding purposes: He doesn't want to give readers the impression that his style of minimalism involves never taking a bath. ;) And he doesn't want to get into a lengthy debate over underwear and soap: As he makes clear in the rest of the post, his goal in life is not to ever think or worry about underwear or soap.)
rkudeshi 15y ago
Looks like CNN did a piece on him back in September 2010: http://articles.cnn.com/2010-09-17/tech/gahran.blogging.ipad_1_blogging-wi-fi-ipad?_s=PM:TECH http://articles.cnn.com/2010-09-17/tech/gahran.blogging.ipad... Interesting that he left his laptop behind and used only an iPad then, but is back to a MacBook Air now.
jdietrich 15y ago
This isn't minimalism in any sense of the word, it's just a consumerist vanity. OP's 'minimalism' is sustained by a reliance upon huge amounts of infrastructure, most of it environmentally unsustainable. He doesn't carry stuff with him, but uses money to access what he needs. It's like claiming to be a minimalist because you own a second house where you keep all your stuff. OP outsources the burden of sustaining his lifestyle to people poorer and browner than himself. He eats without pans and plates because he relies on an army of immigrant workers to cook for him and wash his dishes. He doesn't own bedsheets or a sweeping brush because an immigrant maid cleans his hotel rooms. I don't believe that such an economic relationship is necessarily immoral or exploitative, but it certainly isn't minimalist. OP flew more miles in the summer of 2010 than most people fly in a lifetime. That's hundreds of kilos of Jet-A fuel, a substantial share of the fleet and fixed infrastructure, plus untold amounts of carbon (magnified manifold by being emitted at altitude). He eats meat, which has a vast footprint in terms of land, water and energy use. How minimal is a lifestyle that leads to irrevocable climate change? How minimal is a lifestyle that wastes good soy protein to raise beef cattle? Real minimalists take less than their fair share, not more.
- fady 15y ago
  wow. way to put that in perspective. when you really think about it, it makes sense. i'm a raw vegan and feel like i am more of a minimalist than the OP and i own 100+ things. at first when reading this article, i was imagining my life with only 15 items. then after reading jdietrich post, it made me think a little more.. i would say, i'm very eco-friendly and very aware of my actions. i would not say i'm a minimalist. nothing in my apt is unnatural. no toxic chemicals. from the soap, to the tooth-paste, all the way down to the cleaning products. i compost, recycle, etc..i bike everywhere, use a carshare service (citycarshare), etc etc.. either way, interesting read.
  - wahnfrieden 15y ago
    How much of that stuff is locally produced? Your post is admirable but reminds me of someone I know who buys disposable bamboo plates instead of paper plates to be eco-friendly, discounting that they're produced and shipped from halfway across the earth.
brudgers 15y ago
[tl;dr] Money is fungible.
driverdan 15y ago
In May 2011 I sold nearly everything I owned and traveled for 6 months with just a small backpack. My list was similar to Andrew's with a few more clothing items. I should write a blog post but DL;DR version is that it was well worth it. I don't want to live that way continuously but it made me think a lot more about consumerism. For the most part I lived in hostels and cooked my own food. My living expenses stayed about the same since I wasn't paying rent or maintaining a car. The biggest problem with owning so few items is convenience. You sacrifice the convenience of doing laundry once a week (or less) and having everything you need at hand.
its_so_on 15y ago
my first thought was: "I bet three of them are macbook pros :)." seriously though... Where are his toiletries? Stuff for the kitchen? more socks? everyday bag as opposed to that travelling one? a single book he's reading right now, or a reader like a kindle or whatever? This guy doesnt't look like he's actually living with 15 things, which makes the point kind of moot. He doesn't even have a towel. Let alone anything like a dress shoes. I don't think it's possible to get ownership down to 15 things. Each of the following is an absolutely minimal thing: 1) laptop 2) power adaptor for laptop 3) phone 4) power adapter for phone 5) toothbrush 6) toothpaste 7) underwear 8) underwear 9) underwear 10) pair of socks 11) pair of socks 12) pair of socks 13) shoes 14) jeans 15) jeans 16) everyday bag 17) towel 18) bodywash/shampoo/and shaving cream in one 19) which reminds me: razer BZZZZZZZT over the 15 :) and you're just getting around to being able to shave. 20) shirt 21) shirt 22) shirt 23) sweater 24) sweater If you add some moisterizing cream and maybe a watch and blazer, maybe a second pair of shoes, you're pretty well set though to move to a new city. You don't need a wallet, that's why jeans have pockets. a belt wouldn't kill you either.
- RandallBrown 15y ago
  If you read the article it says he counts stuff like you were buying it at a store. Laptop and charger count as one item. He also said he only counts things he can resell for value so socks and underwear don't count either.
  - its_so_on 15y ago
    That's interesting, though it's hardly true that "this guy owns just 15 things", which is what the title says. Meanwhile, fuckit, I got an actual viable list down to eleven: 1) toothbrush 2) macbook 3) phone 4-5) charger for macbook, phone USB cable 6) some ID 7) jeans (you're going commando here) 8) shoes 9) heavy shirt/sweater type thing 10) a bag And... (laaa - that's angels singing) Credit card. Bon voyage! You might want to buy a coat at the airport, and deoderant.
runjake 15y ago
There's well over 15 things in the picture. Not shown: toothbrush, soap, wash linens, contacts fluid, deodorant, etc. This seems like vanity over minimalism/utility, much like the EDC "every day carry" crowd with their $150 flashlights and $50 pens. Focus on frugality, not brands and numbers.
jackfoxy 15y ago
Never heard of NAU shirts, so I did a minimal look-up, and the minimum price appears to be $72, but they claim to be sustainable, whatever that is.
waldes 15y ago
I don't have any issue with the way he counts his things. But seriously, he must eat at resturants most of the time.
kingkawn 15y ago
It's still too many ugly blue shirts.
swah 15y ago
Scheme vs Common Lisp
sequoia 15y ago
Similar, longer article with a ton of similar discussion can be found here: http://boingboing.net/2010/09/10/technomads.html http://boingboing.net/2010/09/10/technomads.html
sequoia 15y ago
In this picture as well as many other such collections, one thing that stands out to me is the fact that no one has any food. The idea put forth here is to keep in ones life only "absolutely necessary" things, ostensibly as a reaction to consumerism, but when creating lists of absolute necessities, somehow food and shelter do not make the cut. How is this possible? My view is that this "reaction to consumerism" is actually a celebration of consumerism; consumerism boiled down to a pure extract. "Don't do anything for yourself, don't make anything for yourself, don't clean up for yourself: Buy and Throw Away Everything." Some critics have described this lifestyle as parasitic, but I might also suggest "infantile." Someone who lives this way becomes less and less able to care for themself until... well, until they don't know how to make a cup of coffee! That's not extreme minimalism, it's extreme dependence.
- msh 15y ago
  Well written critique, much better that the up voted one that is just mean.
kevinpet 15y ago
This guy is clearly a professional attention whore. It's good to contrast him with "early retirement extreme" who lives in the RV in the East Bay who gets posted from time to time. "15 things" isn't sustainable. It's fake minimalism. It's like saying you're a minimalist after your house burns down and you escape with nothing but your cell phone and credit card. He imposes a significantly higher load on the infrastructure around him (whether he pays for it, or just the kindness of friends letting hin crash on the couch). In contrast, "East Bay RV" really has whittled down his life to just the things he needs.
- mahyarm 15y ago
  Mr. ERE got a job as a finance quant recently. He's still financially independent. http://earlyretirementextreme.com/so-long-and-thanks-for-all-the-fish.html http://earlyretirementextreme.com/so-long-and-thanks-for-all...
deleted 15y ago
[deleted]
Jayasimhan 15y ago
Though Andrew is not a perfect minimalist, there are things that we can learn from him. He has a angle on using minimal stuff and they are pretty much valid. Shopping for fun is a plague in US and increasingly so in the rest of the world too. Here in the bay area, we were given free BART tickets [at the BART stations!] to shop during the holiday season. The kind of minimalism that Andrew has written about needs to be approached from that angle. Of course there is travel, non vegetarian food, use-n-throw things and so on that we need to fix. But this is a step in the right direction. Btw, Why do we need to be hyper critics here on HN? The blog was posted on his own site. Not directly on HN. There is no attention seeking in it. I learn a lot from the comments of each post in HN. The information is great and often eye-opening. I just hope the tone of a comment doesn't fend off its readers.
- ryanwanger 15y ago
  If you seek only comments to agree with the post, go to Reddit. If you seek only comments that disagree with the post, go to Hacker News. Frankly, both have been a HUGE turnoff for me lately.
andrewhyde 15y ago
OP here. I've updated the items I own list (now 39!) and written a bit more about it here. http://andrewhy.de/minimalism-project-update-39-things/ http://andrewhy.de/minimalism-project-update-39-things/ The linked post up top is from May. Lots has changed since then. Great discussion here. Always interesting how people look at the project.
fedxc 15y ago
MacBook Air and iPhone? C'mon!
- antidaily 15y ago
  That's everyone I know practically. What exactly are you trying to say.
lelele 15y ago
To move out of my rented flat without having anywhere to go - besides hotels, I mean - I gave away most of my belongings and it amazed me watching how many items I owned which were sitting there consuming space. Then, after leaving my country with just hand luggage, I've been living minimalistic for the last two months. Yes, it can be done, but it's either time-consuming or expensive, depending on how much you are going to outsource. I have to wash my laundry by hand each other day instead of once a week, and lacking many kitchen items means I spend more time preparing my meals. There is a trade-off to be made between space and time. When you see someone who's consuming little space, it may be that they are consuming either a lot of time or a lot of money. EDIT: Thus, don't feel uncomfortable about owning a lot of things. If you feel so inclined, feel uncomfortable about owning things you don't use. For those who haven't read PG's essay about this issue, which played a part in making me superfluous-aware: http://www.paulgraham.com/stuff.html http://www.paulgraham.com/stuff.html
corkill 15y ago
"Headline: guy owns 15 things ... read article, guy owns more than 15 things." Haha exactly how I felt when I read it. This is a good blog post of gear for this kinda travel or lifestyle http://tynan.com/2010gear http://tynan.com/2010gear. The 14 things I own and the cost of each item. https://docs.google.com/spreadsheet/ccc?key=0AsFrsoFjrGmgdFB6UzFDNXhodFRiNG14bzQ0MWtwVFE https://docs.google.com/spreadsheet/ccc?key=0AsFrsoFjrGmgdFB...
corkill 15y ago
"Headline: guy owns 15 things ... read article, guy owns more than 15 things." Haha exactly how I felt when I read it. This is a good blog post of gear for this kinda travel or lifestyle http://tynan.com/2010gear http://tynan.com/2010gear. The 14 things I own and the cost of each item. https://docs.google.com/spreadsheet/ccc?key=0AsFrsoFjrGmgdFB6UzFDNXhodFRiNG14bzQ0MWtwVFE https://docs.google.com/spreadsheet/ccc?key=0AsFrsoFjrGmgdFB...
larrys 15y ago
Well first he has one more thing of value in addition to those mentioned. He owns andrewhy.de domain name which has links and traffic. And he can sell that because the traffic and links have value. According the the dubious compete.com numbers traffic spiked to about 25k visitors in Sept. of 2011. (It's less now.) According to alexa.com he has 351 sites linking in. Oh one more thing. What he is doing is known as a publicity stunt. I've done them and I know one when I see it.
njharman 15y ago
It's really really weird to me that someone who wants to own as few things as possible (i.e. be unmaterialistic) is so focused on brands. (which to me is the height of materialism owning/valuing/recognizing something for it's label rather than substance). Seems like it's just a gimmick, something to fill blog posts with.
- lnanek 15y ago
  Brands are often a nice shortcut to find a quality item. I was researching a coat for a woman the other day and was looking at a fancy brand one vs. a knockoff. After reading all the reviews it turned out the brand one was much more fitted (shows off your form, not a shapeless box) and had a better closure mechanism (a series of snaps at the bottom below the zipper for closing it up when you are waiting at a bus or something). The brand one isn't competing on razor thin margins to be the cheapest version on the block, so they can spend more money on materials and design and the like. If you don't know clothes very well, it can be a shortcut to an actual, in person, feature by feature comparison in detail. This might mean being able to buy online, or only after visiting one store, instead of visiting a couple. At many income levels, it can make sense to spend money to save time.

184 points by wgx 15y ago

nodata 15y ago

I'd like to know how many things he has on that Macbook air.

goo 15y ago
You might be surprised -- a minimalist mindset can extend toward computer habits as well. Also, just as he relies on society to provide him with essentials like food, so too could he rely on cloud providers like Google Docs to take care of his document storage -- though of course he would still own his Google account. It's no stretch to compare Mimimalism to a thin-client computing design -- it is made possible by the existence of an excellent network of other person-nodes, and it reduces the emotional and physical "computational" overhead of owning things. Also, in response to come other comments in this thread: to argue that he is parasitic requires the moral stance that using things you do not own is parasitic, regardless of the other contributions you make to society (including paying for the temporary use of those things!). Which is bollocks.

jpiasetz 15y ago

It's always interesting how people define what is a thing. He's got a good definition but he should take it a step further. Expand it to anything that you have that you would feel bad if you had to replace. The digital clutter weights on your mind just like physical objects (files on the macbook, email in gmail, all of it). Also although he list the items that he'd be pissed if he lost he'd probably be a lot less angry them a lot of people if he was robbed. Simpler and cheaper to only have to replace 15 items.

epo 15y ago

I had a boss once who went on at great length about the benefits of the paperless office. His office was indeed devoid of paper storage, his secretary's office however, had loads of filing cabinets stuffed full of papers. Self-regarding parasites like this just offload all their support systems onto other people and then brag about how minimal and self sufficient they are.

waitwhat 15y ago
Mr. Hyde [...] is currently homeless I don’t have a permanent address Alex Hillman let me crash on his couch So basically: Homeless man has few possessions.
- DanBC 15y ago
  ...and is lucky that he know people who do have houses, and houses big enough (with couches) who let him stay.
  - matwood 15y ago
    ...and TVs for him to watch, food for him to eat, coffee makers for him to use... Years ago I was pretty minimalist. I didn't want to own anything that I couldn't walk away from. So in my apartment I had a bed, a computer, a small TV, a surfboard, and a couple of plastic deck chairs to sit on. Today I have quite a few more things in my house but my attitude towards what I own is still the same. That I think is what is important.
  - drumdance 15y ago
    Yeah. Blind, random luck. It's not like he spent years building relationships with people and becoming the kind of guy that people like to have as a house guest.
ap22213 15y ago
So, perhaps you are against self-regarding people and braggarts and not necessarily minimalism? There's no such thing as being self-sufficient. But, having ditched 90% of my possessions over the years, I have to say that removing all that material burden has felt damn great. One of the best things I've ever done.
nhangen 15y ago
That's exactly it - many 'minimalists' I know live just like this, but never have any money, always need a place to stay or a ride, never want to chip in at the nice restaurants because of point #1, and make it extremely uncomfortable for the rest of us 'consumerists.' I get it, having less can be good, but not at the cost of friendships and a healthy lifestyle. Oh, and did I mention that many of these clothing items, which get re-used often, get nasty fast.

jister 15y ago

Balance. An extreme of "something" is not good...

koningrobot 15y ago
What do you mean by "balance"? Is it that which you and the culture that conditioned you would consider "normal"?
- danieldk 15y ago
  That's a good question. But such things go together with a certain lifestyle. For example, when you start having children, it becomes terribly hard to have such a lifestyle. Not only do they need toys and more clothes. But you will require a bigger house, a bigger house goes together with tools for fix stuff, etc. The question is whether you should define minimalism quantitatively or qualitatively. Isn't minimalism to buy what you need to lead a reasonable life, rather than a race to have the lowers number of possessions? The minimum number depends on so many factors: family size, illnesses, hobbies (some people require only a GPS for hiking, others need a climbing gear), etc.
VonLipwig 15y ago
How extreme is it really? The guy has 15 things with resale value that he treasures. How many things to do you own that you use day in, day out that you treasure. For me, discarding kitchen things and stuff needed to run a house (furniture, hoover, ironing board etc) I use / wear maybe 25 things frequently. The main difference between that guy and most people is he chooses to sell / discard / not buy crap he doesn't need. Most people accumulate stuff and fill their attic with it.
gizmo 15y ago
I consider it a good thing when a person is extremely reasonable. Or extremely thoughtful. Or extremely honest. Or extremely patient. Or extremely gracious. We don't need balance in all things. A rocket only makes it safely to the moon if the engineers are extremely cautious. Bill Gates is extremely charitable. Einstein was extremely intelligent. The idea that "extreme X for any X" is bad is some sort of pseudo-wisdom that doesn't even pass the sniff test.

kennywinker 15y ago

Headline: guy owns 15 things ... read article, guy owns more than 15 things. New headling: "Guy reaches new heights of extreme minimalism by ignoring a bunch of the things that he owns". But I guess it was a minimalist headline, so that was too long...?

nodata 15y ago
Laptop charger, phone charger, money to own washing powder to wash clothes. "Toiletry kit" is a cheat, so add: razor, shaving foam, blades, toothpaste, toothbrush, towel, shampoo, shower gel, etc. etc. etc.
- JamesNK 15y ago
  It may not be physical but he has a blog, that's a thing. Email address, tumbler account, Flicker account, etc, etc.
  - SquareWheel 15y ago
    I'd disagree, simply because you could take that to the extreme. Does he own the water he drinks, the air he breathes, the life he lives through? As far as I can see, we're talking strictly in physical items.
    - nodata 15y ago
      Then let's talk about items that were once physical. He owns some music. He owns some movies. He owns lots of documents. et cetera.
      - SquareWheel 15y ago
        We can take that further. If clumps of data that make up a "file" is a possession, what about the thousands of executable and library files that make up his operating system? He may not use the calculator or chess game, but his computer surely comes with that. What about every bit that make those up? We need a clear line or this gets silly, and I think physical possessions is a clear enough line.

michael_dorfman 15y ago

Most Buddhist monks could easily get under the "15 things" limit-- the standard list of possessions is: three robes, an alms bowl, a cloth belt, a needle and thread, a razor for shaving the head, and a water filter.

ramblerman 15y ago
And a dog just needs a stick. I don't think it's about competition.
kahawe 15y ago
Also, they have all other things provided for them without actually owning them.
its_so_on 15y ago
that's pretty good. source? with a wish-list like that what do they need alms for? I couldn't live without a toothbrush though.
- jff 15y ago
  The money they are given probably helps buy food, since not even the magical Buddhist monks can survive without at least a little rice.
  - wollw 15y ago
    Actually, according to the Buddhist monastic code they aren't allowed to have money. I know a very large number (probably the majority) of monks these days do accept money but I know of and have lived with those that don't. In the communities that respect the Vinaya[1] there are 227 rules that fully ordained monks are supposed to follow. Novices have ten rules[2] and one of them is not to handle money. [1]http://www.accesstoinsight.org/lib/authors/thanissaro/bmc1/bmc1.intro.html http://www.accesstoinsight.org/lib/authors/thanissaro/bmc1/b... [2]http://www.accesstoinsight.org/ptf/dhamma/sila/dasasila.html http://www.accesstoinsight.org/ptf/dhamma/sila/dasasila.html

agumonkey 15y ago

Next step, extrem bootstraping, define the kernel to rebuild everything you need. Living From Scratch v1

skbohra123 15y ago

That's actually more stuff than most of the middle class Indians have. Hmmm

sopooneo 15y ago
Maybe more retail value, but as for number of items? I believe a typical middle class Indian has a lot more.

mmahemoff 15y ago

See also: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Digital_nomad http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Digital_nomad

nickpinkston 15y ago
http://www.thrillingheroics.com/digital-nomad-academy-–-were-doing-it http://www.thrillingheroics.com/digital-nomad-academy-–-were... Neat site about Digital Nomadist, and an article on the Academy for it.

DanBC 15y ago

Curious that he doesn't mention "big bank balance" which makes life a lot more comfortable for him. He needs food? He buys food. He needs emergency accommodation? (Because his friend's house burns down or some such) He can buy that accommodation for the nights he needs it. Having just become homeless[1] myself (not through choice) I've whittled down my possessions to something that's easy to carry. Following his rules (stuff that'd be annoying to buy again) I have a computer; a games console; an mp3 player; some headphones; a kindle; one pair trousers. I have more clothes, but they're easy to replace. The Kindle is odd - one item, with many books on it. But they are easy to replace. Personally, I think that's a flaw in his method. By a more reasonable counting system I have money (not much, but much more than other people in similar situations in my country, and very very much more than people in other countries); I have the gadgets (and associated chargers / headphones / cases / bags / media / software); I have clothes. [1] As I've mentioned it, take a look at this website. (http://gloshomeseeker.co.uk http://gloshomeseeker.co.uk) It's aimed at people needing "social housing". (I don't; I have no idea why I was given that URL, maybe it's just the script they follow.) IT IS AN APPALLING WEBSITE, AND A DREADFUL FORM. From the broken security mixing secure and insecure stuff, to the weird form flow.

mgkimsal 15y ago
... to the 420k image of a 306k document. Firebug shows it as 1.1m, but headers say 420k. Oh, and the image is 'no-cache' so it'll reload on every page request from a server apparently running on a 64k ISDN line. Yes, that's a pretty bad site. :/
rufibarbatus 15y ago
I'm not sure if Mr Hyde's definition of a personal possession was a (well-played) PR trick or simply a certain lack of accounting intuition. Which is a shame, because his putative balance sheet should be a fascinating thing to think about. If we were to take a look at his assets and guess reasonable values for each category of asset, I wouldn't be surprised if all 15 items he listed (give or take his wallet and computer) ended up in a catch-all 1%-of-total-value "other assets" category. In reality, Mr Hyde's own description of how he lives (and how he manages to get around with so few 'objects') suggests that the most valuable things he has, by far, are (and probably in that order): his contacts, his reputation, and his cash. Close to these three, his clothes, iPod and sneakers, however annoying to replace he imagines them to be, should be next to meaningless.

personlurking 15y ago

If he can group things together like his 'toiletry kit', then I'll do the same with my clothes (though I have toiletries, too). Aside from my clothes, I have 10 books, a laptop and a cell phone. If we're going off of things I'd be pissed if someone stole then that'd be my MBA and all of my clothes...so I guess I kind of own two things. I've lived like this for 10 years.

deleted 15y ago

[deleted]

pistoriusp 15y ago

If he didn't have friends or family willing to give him a place to stay then he would have to increase the number of things that he owned. Which isn't a bad thing. Certain objects are worthwhile owning. I'm particularly fond of robots which decrease my need to do menial labour. My washing machine and dishwasher saves me at least 30 minutes a day.

Alexx 15y ago

Minimalism and 'getting rid of your possessions' has been one of those hot internet topics for as long as I can remember. The trend I notice is that the articles preaching the extreme end of this are almost always written by 20-something bloggers who are so much happier now they're couch surfing the world care free rather than 'working 9-5 to pay for that TV'. Obviously, there is a large truth in there. We all take only a few things on holiday with us and enjoy it. But sleeping on other peoples couches, using their kitchens, bathrooms and towels, and freelancing to get some money to your paypal account now and then isn't a particularly sustainable lifestyle. I suspect if you came back in 10 years you'll see a different picture. If you want to think about having children or living a generally western lifestyle as opposed to a '3rd world' or really homeless lifestyle then there's a sensible balance point. I believe rejecting materialism is about giving your energy, focus and love to your passions, your family, and enjoying the experiences life gives you over material things. Not blindly aiming to own 10 or 20 objects while you're basically renting or borrowing everything else to keep living in a western style. All things in moderation :)

kahawe 15y ago
Also, in 10 years you are 10 years behind on working experience and have a big hole on your CV with nothing much to show for but a couple of blog entries and tons of pictures. And I couldn't agree more with your last paragraph.
gldalmaso 15y ago
>> Not blindly aiming to own 10 or 20 objects That is the essence of what is really wrong with this effort. By focusing so much on living with just a few items, your life is still being ruled by materialism, just in a different end of the spectrum. Someone mentioned monks, so take their teaching and aim for the middle road.
georgieporgie 15y ago
I suspect if you came back in 10 years you'll see a different picture. If you want to think about having children or living a generally western lifestyle as opposed to a '3rd world' or really homeless lifestyle then there's a sensible balance point. There's no reason he couldn't continue to live a substantially minimalist lifestyle while adding a family. He could migrate into living on a sailboat, RV, or in a home considered tiny by Western (American, particularly) standards.

jiggy2011 15y ago

I also own practically nothing apart from my clothes (all bought at discount stores) and the food in my fridge. All my tech needs are met by work , my furniture came with my (rented) house and my TV etc are mostly other peoples cast offs.

jarek 15y ago
Just because you didn't pay for your TV doesn't mean you don't own it.

fauigerzigerk 15y ago

My own experience from living out of a max 20kg suitcase is that owning too few things forces you to think about things a lot more than you would like to. Do I keep this? What do I throw away instead? Where do I get this quickly if such and such event occurs? What's the cost of buying this versus keeping/transporting it. Who can I borrow this from? Am I bothering them too much if I borrow this again? Etc, etc. My conclusion is that owning too much stuff increases complexity, but owning too little does too and it can be very expensive.

zerostar07 15y ago
Agree. I think the key idea is to minimize the time it takes to think about the things you own.

jodrellblank 15y ago

Bit of a success for Apple that this guy pared his life down to 15 things and 2 of them are Apple products.

tambourine_man 15y ago
Not only that, but all his consumer electronics are made by them. Heck, almost everything not wearable or clothe related is Apple's.

ck2 15y ago

When you go to starbucks each morning, spending $100 a month there instead of owning your own coffeemaker - it's not minimalism. It's consumerism. Trying living with just what he has in a 3rd world country and it's minimalism.

deleted 15y ago
[deleted]
ctdonath 15y ago
If, by leveraging Starbucks convenience, he can save/make more than $100/mo then it is minimalism. High mobility comes to mind; a traveling consultant might not be home enough to warrant owning a coffeemaker, and [in]convenience of a portable set (AeroPress + Hairo MiniMill) may be problematic. While minimalism and survivalism have a great deal in common, they are not equals. Try living in a city with what a 3rd worlder does and it's a punishable offense (possession/use of large knife, firestarter, chickens, etc.).
readme 15y ago
Starbucks does add up, but I would say that it is minimalism (Especially if you are using it as an office) From an individual's perspective, it is not minimalist, because now you will need to have an entire coffee shop in your life to obtain coffee. However, from a societal viewpoint, it is very minimalist, because now each person can share the means to produce coffee, thus consuming less: electricity, water (assuming most dump some out), coffee supplies/coffee, and coffee brewing equipment (really, we don't all need our own machine... well, I do. but that's why I am a capitalist)
- Retric 15y ago
  I think just printing a receipt for each cup makes the whole process less efficient for society. Let alone disposable cups etc.
  - ctdonath 15y ago
    Starbucks doesn't print a receipt unless you want one, and you are welcome to bring & fill your own mug there. You can even use your smartphone to pay.

waitwhat 15y ago

There is also the hipster version of this: http://theburninghouse.com/ http://theburninghouse.com/ "If your house was burning, what would you take with you? It's a conflict between what's practical, valuable and sentimental."

arethuza 15y ago
If our home was burning the only things I'd be bothered about getting to safety would by my wife and son, then our cats. Nothing else matters in that context.
- paisible 15y ago
  how right you are !
- Retric 15y ago
  It's situational. Outside of a major emergency, taking an extra 15 seconds to get your cellphone, wallet, and key's would probably would probably be worth it, come home and your house is on fire just let it burn. Also, as long as the fire is contained in a single room simply closing the door can do a lot to save your home.
run4yourlives 15y ago
This website makes me sad for our species. Somebody thinks "Rolling Stone" is essential.

ffffruit 15y ago

I remember reading somewhere that S. Jobs was of a similar mentality; at times he only kept a Tiffany's lamp, a chair and a bed in this apartment.

DanBC 15y ago

Does he have health insurance? I'm guessing that's a pretty big thing.

TomAnthony 15y ago

There are a bunch of comments that this guy actually owns more than 15 things, and that others cope with less, and he isn't in the 3rd world etc. All true; his system isn't as extreme as the headline would have you believe. However, I see the takeaway is that he gets by with a lot less stuff than the average person in his demographic, and I think that is something to be applauded. I know I wouldn't relish doing it like he has, but it has made me think I could get by with less.

Avshalom 15y ago
That he doesn't actually seem to get by with less is people's problem. He's essentially just renting everything, very inefficiently at that. It's ridiculous to applaud the idea -of buying coffee at a restaurant every day instead of owning a coffee maker- as "doing with less"
- mechanical_fish 15y ago
  Not ridiculous at all, in context. It's all about marginal costs. If owning something would require you to rent a room that you might otherwise not have to rent, its marginal cost could be hundreds of dollars per month. There are portable coffeemakers for backpackers, but there's no such thing as lightweight portable coffee beans, and buying coffee beans in one-cup units on an as-needed basis is pretty expensive, in time if nothing else. As for whether traveling constantly and renting all your stuff is "inefficient": Well, sure. But to be alive is to be inefficient. Dead people are maximally efficient. But they also aren't having any fun. There's no prize for having lots of leftover money when you're dead. As they say, you can't take it with you.
anamax 15y ago
> However, I see the takeaway is that he gets by with a lot less stuff than the average person in his demographic Except that he doesn't. He merely doesn't own the stuff that he uses/consumes.
- TomAnthony 15y ago

vae77 15y ago

In terms of software... very bloated.

nandemo 15y ago
Indeed. If you own a device running a modern processor and OS, you got extreme miniaturization hiding in (skimpy) minimalism's clothes. A sheepherder in Afghanistan might own a hundred items more than this guy, yet he lives a simpler life by any reasonable definition.

giddas 15y ago

Amazing how offended some people seem to be by him omitting a few thing - who really cares

kahawe 15y ago
> Amazing how offended some people seem to be by him omitting a few thing - who really cares If I promise to give you 50 bucks for some software you wrote and then I only give you 10, you wouldn't be offended or complain, right?
- RodgerTheGreat 15y ago
  Perhaps a closer analogy would be "If I was playing golf with you and I took 6 strokes for a hole, would you be offended if I called that a hole-in-one?"
- drumdance 15y ago
  Seriously? Clicking on a link with a vaguely misleading headline is the same as giving someone $50? Really?
  - kahawe 15y ago
    I was promised something by the (outrageously) surprising claim in the headline and the article could not remotely keep up... and this was the first analogy that came to my mind - in both cases something was promised but then not fulfilled.
andrewhyde 15y ago
I am constantly amazed with a) peoples obsessions with underwear and b) how really bent up people get over a number being 16 instead of 15. I said somewhere in the comments that I was disqualified for the minimalist Olympics... Hello from Colorado!

rkudeshi 15y ago

If you happen to be interested in more "minimalist porn", I too made a list of the things I was living with at one point last year. http://raviudeshi.com/2011/02/75-things http://raviudeshi.com/2011/02/75-things With hindsight, I can say it's not at all about the number, but more the mentality. I don't know about this guy, but so long as you find a hostel/apartment/friend with some basic cooking utensils and Internet, it's not too hard to keep your costs very low.

kahawe 15y ago
> but so long as you find a hostel/apartment/friend with some basic cooking utensils and Internet, it's not too hard to keep your costs very low. Sorry to be nitpicking here, that "minimalism porn" thing is a completely new curiosity for me, but technically you just shift ownership and costs (by mooching) but you still take advantage of those things or services - which really isn't all that minimalistic at all.
- arethuza 15y ago
  If the 15 things were meant to keep you alive in a wilderness area for a couple of months then I'd find the whole thing a lot more interesting - living "minimally" in an urban environment with a healthy bank balance doesn't seem that much of a challenge.
  - dirtyaura 15y ago
    I don't think people are after "a challenge" with this minimalist urban life style. It just feels good to be free of stuff. At least for me it was one of the greatest periods of my life. Around 10 years ago, after a breakup with a girl I was living with, I got rid of most of my stuff, mainly kept a few clothes and things that I couldn't replace somehow like letters from my friends and photographs. But furniture, utensils, books, CDs, vinyls, all that I sold to thrift stores. The feeling was awesome, being free from stuff and relationship. There was nothing challenging living that way. Only challenge was a decision to get rid of stuff (and her).

dimitar 15y ago

Minimalism - asceticism for rich people? Did I get it?

gbog 15y ago

This guy still owns too much. When I was in Nepal with a friend studying migration, we saw many guys wlaking to India with: Their clothes (2 pieces) Their plastic slippers A cloth bag with, inside: One toothbrush A few rupies.

ctdonath 15y ago
Whenever preparing to travel, I always try to allay my wife's "maybe I forgot something!" fears by asking "got passport? credit card? yes? then we're ready to go." My personal version: knife, firestarter, meds http://db.tt/rU56upUK http://db.tt/rU56upUK

powertower 15y ago

This reminds me of an old joke: What do you call a man with no material possessions? A man without a girlfriend.

zeteo 15y ago
> What do you call a man with no material possessions? Recently divorced.

bane 15y ago

My wife and I were were struck by something recently while standing at the checkout line at a Nike store, looking at a display case full of specialized, expensive, pedometers. Not a one was a useful as the jogging app I have on my phone. And when we're out jogging, I listen to music, or streaming radio...on my phone. And oh yeah, if it's late and I'm going through the local woods, my phone has an app that turns it into a flashlight. And now suddenly a bit of enlightenment hit us. A modern smartphone replaces a great many discrete devices that we used to have to carry around, or at least store someplace: Common uses for our phones: 1) A portable phone 2) A small portable computer 3) An address book (yes, I used to carry one around with my old non-smart phone) 4) A map book 5) A GPS 6) An mp3/music player 7) A radio (fm tuner, but more importantly streaming radio, flipping through global stations on my phone reminded my of being 9 with a shortwave receiver and picking up broadcasts of Voice of America going into Europe) 8) A flashlight 9) A pedometer 10) A portable book (actually a library) 11) A thumb drive 12) A portable translator 13) A portable gaming device 14) A camera 15) A videocamera 16) Alarm clock 17) Portable calculator 18) Barcode scanner 19) A wifi signal scanner 20) Portable movie player 21) Starbucks card And a few others... And suddenly all that junk is in one device, a backpack full of stuff. Coming up this year they're going to be useful as credit cards, business cards, some have projectors on them, better optics and I can junk my binoculars, a decent way to hook up a keyboard and monitor (it can already act as it's own trackpad, oh I forgot to mention that, I can use it as a trackpad on my computer) and I can junk my laptop for 85% of what I do. These aren't phones, these are some kind of sci-fi multi-tool. We're ending up in a measure of minimalism de facto just by having more versatile stuff. So yeah, looking around my house, I could probably ditch a ton of stuff (I mean literally, I have several full bookshelves I could potentially replace) and not miss it.

mahyarm 15y ago
A portable monitor, keyboard and battery for that monitor will take about as much space and weight as an ultrabook anyway. You'll probably shave off a pound & half an inch and get similar battery life at most. The closest thing I can think of that would be as portable as a phone would be something like a laser keyboard and a mini projector built into one.

deleted 15y ago

[deleted]

keiferski 15y ago

Having been a "minimalism-addict", I've come to the conclusion that the best part is the act of getting rid of things, not the act of having few things. Getting rid of junk is liberating; living with 15 things is just a pain in the ass.

engblaze 15y ago
Absolutely... the spirit of reducing waste and consumerism is admirable, but this guy is being ridiculous by claiming that he only owns "15 things". Not only is he missing the point, but his hyperbole is out of control. A toiletry kit is 1 item? Right. Bike Snob NYC has a hilarious post on Hyde if you haven't seen it: http://bikesnobnyc.blogspot.com/2011/05/paring-down-and-pairing-up-its-not-size.html http://bikesnobnyc.blogspot.com/2011/05/paring-down-and-pair...
- dpark 15y ago
  > A toiletry kit is 1 item? Right. Pft. I only own one item. A house. In fact, I'm married, so I really own half an item. Pretty minimalist, right?
- atourgates 15y ago
  Ahh yes, I wondered if this was the same gentlemen who was the subject of so much fantastic BSNYC lampooning earlier this year. It's worth noting that he hasn't stopped. http://bikesnobnyc.blogspot.com/2011/12/2011-year-walls-kept-closing-in.html http://bikesnobnyc.blogspot.com/2011/12/2011-year-walls-kept... is quite excellent, with such lines as, "So, being the good minimalist that he is, he immediately paid way too much for almost nothing." I think the truth is somewhere between the two hyperboles. Gram Hill's minimalism as an overriding cause is taken to completely silly extremes. However, the principle of getting rid of shit you don't need (and better yet, not buying shit you don't need in the first place) is quite sound.
- mechanical_fish 15y ago
  Actually, the OP provides a fairly insightful definition of "item": I count my things as resellable items I would be pissed if someone took. By this definition an "item" is "one emotional connection to an object", not merely an object itself. Yes, this means that the guy carries around many more physical objects than he counts as "items". This seems emotionally healthy, though, if one can afford it. And affording it is easier than ever: This is not the 18th century, and underwear is so cheap that, were a pair to be stolen, you're out the cost of a cup of coffee. (By his own definition, I wonder whether the OP really "owns" a toiletry kit. Even a moderately fancy toiletry kit is worth maybe twenty bucks and can be replaced in ten minutes at any drugstore. And they're certainly not resellable. So I tend to suspect the OP's toiletry kit appears in this list mainly for branding purposes: He doesn't want to give readers the impression that his style of minimalism involves never taking a bath. ;) And he doesn't want to get into a lengthy debate over underwear and soap: As he makes clear in the rest of the post, his goal in life is not to ever think or worry about underwear or soap.)

rkudeshi 15y ago

Looks like CNN did a piece on him back in September 2010: http://articles.cnn.com/2010-09-17/tech/gahran.blogging.ipad_1_blogging-wi-fi-ipad?_s=PM:TECH http://articles.cnn.com/2010-09-17/tech/gahran.blogging.ipad... Interesting that he left his laptop behind and used only an iPad then, but is back to a MacBook Air now.

jdietrich 15y ago

This isn't minimalism in any sense of the word, it's just a consumerist vanity. OP's 'minimalism' is sustained by a reliance upon huge amounts of infrastructure, most of it environmentally unsustainable. He doesn't carry stuff with him, but uses money to access what he needs. It's like claiming to be a minimalist because you own a second house where you keep all your stuff. OP outsources the burden of sustaining his lifestyle to people poorer and browner than himself. He eats without pans and plates because he relies on an army of immigrant workers to cook for him and wash his dishes. He doesn't own bedsheets or a sweeping brush because an immigrant maid cleans his hotel rooms. I don't believe that such an economic relationship is necessarily immoral or exploitative, but it certainly isn't minimalist. OP flew more miles in the summer of 2010 than most people fly in a lifetime. That's hundreds of kilos of Jet-A fuel, a substantial share of the fleet and fixed infrastructure, plus untold amounts of carbon (magnified manifold by being emitted at altitude). He eats meat, which has a vast footprint in terms of land, water and energy use. How minimal is a lifestyle that leads to irrevocable climate change? How minimal is a lifestyle that wastes good soy protein to raise beef cattle? Real minimalists take less than their fair share, not more.

fady 15y ago
wow. way to put that in perspective. when you really think about it, it makes sense. i'm a raw vegan and feel like i am more of a minimalist than the OP and i own 100+ things. at first when reading this article, i was imagining my life with only 15 items. then after reading jdietrich post, it made me think a little more.. i would say, i'm very eco-friendly and very aware of my actions. i would not say i'm a minimalist. nothing in my apt is unnatural. no toxic chemicals. from the soap, to the tooth-paste, all the way down to the cleaning products. i compost, recycle, etc..i bike everywhere, use a carshare service (citycarshare), etc etc.. either way, interesting read.
- wahnfrieden 15y ago
  How much of that stuff is locally produced? Your post is admirable but reminds me of someone I know who buys disposable bamboo plates instead of paper plates to be eco-friendly, discounting that they're produced and shipped from halfway across the earth.

brudgers 15y ago

[tl;dr] Money is fungible.

driverdan 15y ago

In May 2011 I sold nearly everything I owned and traveled for 6 months with just a small backpack. My list was similar to Andrew's with a few more clothing items. I should write a blog post but DL;DR version is that it was well worth it. I don't want to live that way continuously but it made me think a lot more about consumerism. For the most part I lived in hostels and cooked my own food. My living expenses stayed about the same since I wasn't paying rent or maintaining a car. The biggest problem with owning so few items is convenience. You sacrifice the convenience of doing laundry once a week (or less) and having everything you need at hand.

its_so_on 15y ago

my first thought was: "I bet three of them are macbook pros :)." seriously though... Where are his toiletries? Stuff for the kitchen? more socks? everyday bag as opposed to that travelling one? a single book he's reading right now, or a reader like a kindle or whatever? This guy doesnt't look like he's actually living with 15 things, which makes the point kind of moot. He doesn't even have a towel. Let alone anything like a dress shoes. I don't think it's possible to get ownership down to 15 things. Each of the following is an absolutely minimal thing: 1) laptop 2) power adaptor for laptop 3) phone 4) power adapter for phone 5) toothbrush 6) toothpaste 7) underwear 8) underwear 9) underwear 10) pair of socks 11) pair of socks 12) pair of socks 13) shoes 14) jeans 15) jeans 16) everyday bag 17) towel 18) bodywash/shampoo/and shaving cream in one 19) which reminds me: razer BZZZZZZZT over the 15 :) and you're just getting around to being able to shave. 20) shirt 21) shirt 22) shirt 23) sweater 24) sweater If you add some moisterizing cream and maybe a watch and blazer, maybe a second pair of shoes, you're pretty well set though to move to a new city. You don't need a wallet, that's why jeans have pockets. a belt wouldn't kill you either.

RandallBrown 15y ago
If you read the article it says he counts stuff like you were buying it at a store. Laptop and charger count as one item. He also said he only counts things he can resell for value so socks and underwear don't count either.
- its_so_on 15y ago
  That's interesting, though it's hardly true that "this guy owns just 15 things", which is what the title says. Meanwhile, fuckit, I got an actual viable list down to eleven: 1) toothbrush 2) macbook 3) phone 4-5) charger for macbook, phone USB cable 6) some ID 7) jeans (you're going commando here) 8) shoes 9) heavy shirt/sweater type thing 10) a bag And... (laaa - that's angels singing) Credit card. Bon voyage! You might want to buy a coat at the airport, and deoderant.

runjake 15y ago

There's well over 15 things in the picture. Not shown: toothbrush, soap, wash linens, contacts fluid, deodorant, etc. This seems like vanity over minimalism/utility, much like the EDC "every day carry" crowd with their $150 flashlights and $50 pens. Focus on frugality, not brands and numbers.

jackfoxy 15y ago

Never heard of NAU shirts, so I did a minimal look-up, and the minimum price appears to be $72, but they claim to be sustainable, whatever that is.

waldes 15y ago

I don't have any issue with the way he counts his things. But seriously, he must eat at resturants most of the time.

kingkawn 15y ago

It's still too many ugly blue shirts.

swah 15y ago

Scheme vs Common Lisp

sequoia 15y ago

Similar, longer article with a ton of similar discussion can be found here: http://boingboing.net/2010/09/10/technomads.html http://boingboing.net/2010/09/10/technomads.html

sequoia 15y ago

In this picture as well as many other such collections, one thing that stands out to me is the fact that no one has any food. The idea put forth here is to keep in ones life only "absolutely necessary" things, ostensibly as a reaction to consumerism, but when creating lists of absolute necessities, somehow food and shelter do not make the cut. How is this possible? My view is that this "reaction to consumerism" is actually a celebration of consumerism; consumerism boiled down to a pure extract. "Don't do anything for yourself, don't make anything for yourself, don't clean up for yourself: Buy and Throw Away Everything." Some critics have described this lifestyle as parasitic, but I might also suggest "infantile." Someone who lives this way becomes less and less able to care for themself until... well, until they don't know how to make a cup of coffee! That's not extreme minimalism, it's extreme dependence.

msh 15y ago
Well written critique, much better that the up voted one that is just mean.

kevinpet 15y ago

This guy is clearly a professional attention whore. It's good to contrast him with "early retirement extreme" who lives in the RV in the East Bay who gets posted from time to time. "15 things" isn't sustainable. It's fake minimalism. It's like saying you're a minimalist after your house burns down and you escape with nothing but your cell phone and credit card. He imposes a significantly higher load on the infrastructure around him (whether he pays for it, or just the kindness of friends letting hin crash on the couch). In contrast, "East Bay RV" really has whittled down his life to just the things he needs.

mahyarm 15y ago
Mr. ERE got a job as a finance quant recently. He's still financially independent. http://earlyretirementextreme.com/so-long-and-thanks-for-all-the-fish.html http://earlyretirementextreme.com/so-long-and-thanks-for-all...

deleted 15y ago

[deleted]

Jayasimhan 15y ago

Though Andrew is not a perfect minimalist, there are things that we can learn from him. He has a angle on using minimal stuff and they are pretty much valid. Shopping for fun is a plague in US and increasingly so in the rest of the world too. Here in the bay area, we were given free BART tickets [at the BART stations!] to shop during the holiday season. The kind of minimalism that Andrew has written about needs to be approached from that angle. Of course there is travel, non vegetarian food, use-n-throw things and so on that we need to fix. But this is a step in the right direction. Btw, Why do we need to be hyper critics here on HN? The blog was posted on his own site. Not directly on HN. There is no attention seeking in it. I learn a lot from the comments of each post in HN. The information is great and often eye-opening. I just hope the tone of a comment doesn't fend off its readers.

ryanwanger 15y ago
If you seek only comments to agree with the post, go to Reddit. If you seek only comments that disagree with the post, go to Hacker News. Frankly, both have been a HUGE turnoff for me lately.

andrewhyde 15y ago

OP here. I've updated the items I own list (now 39!) and written a bit more about it here. http://andrewhy.de/minimalism-project-update-39-things/ http://andrewhy.de/minimalism-project-update-39-things/ The linked post up top is from May. Lots has changed since then. Great discussion here. Always interesting how people look at the project.

fedxc 15y ago

MacBook Air and iPhone? C'mon!

antidaily 15y ago
That's everyone I know practically. What exactly are you trying to say.

lelele 15y ago

To move out of my rented flat without having anywhere to go - besides hotels, I mean - I gave away most of my belongings and it amazed me watching how many items I owned which were sitting there consuming space. Then, after leaving my country with just hand luggage, I've been living minimalistic for the last two months. Yes, it can be done, but it's either time-consuming or expensive, depending on how much you are going to outsource. I have to wash my laundry by hand each other day instead of once a week, and lacking many kitchen items means I spend more time preparing my meals. There is a trade-off to be made between space and time. When you see someone who's consuming little space, it may be that they are consuming either a lot of time or a lot of money. EDIT: Thus, don't feel uncomfortable about owning a lot of things. If you feel so inclined, feel uncomfortable about owning things you don't use. For those who haven't read PG's essay about this issue, which played a part in making me superfluous-aware: http://www.paulgraham.com/stuff.html http://www.paulgraham.com/stuff.html

corkill 15y ago

"Headline: guy owns 15 things ... read article, guy owns more than 15 things." Haha exactly how I felt when I read it. This is a good blog post of gear for this kinda travel or lifestyle http://tynan.com/2010gear http://tynan.com/2010gear. The 14 things I own and the cost of each item. https://docs.google.com/spreadsheet/ccc?key=0AsFrsoFjrGmgdFB6UzFDNXhodFRiNG14bzQ0MWtwVFE https://docs.google.com/spreadsheet/ccc?key=0AsFrsoFjrGmgdFB...

corkill 15y ago

larrys 15y ago

Well first he has one more thing of value in addition to those mentioned. He owns andrewhy.de domain name which has links and traffic. And he can sell that because the traffic and links have value. According the the dubious compete.com numbers traffic spiked to about 25k visitors in Sept. of 2011. (It's less now.) According to alexa.com he has 351 sites linking in. Oh one more thing. What he is doing is known as a publicity stunt. I've done them and I know one when I see it.

njharman 15y ago

It's really really weird to me that someone who wants to own as few things as possible (i.e. be unmaterialistic) is so focused on brands. (which to me is the height of materialism owning/valuing/recognizing something for it's label rather than substance). Seems like it's just a gimmick, something to fill blog posts with.

lnanek 15y ago
Brands are often a nice shortcut to find a quality item. I was researching a coat for a woman the other day and was looking at a fancy brand one vs. a knockoff. After reading all the reviews it turned out the brand one was much more fitted (shows off your form, not a shapeless box) and had a better closure mechanism (a series of snaps at the bottom below the zipper for closing it up when you are waiting at a bus or something). The brand one isn't competing on razor thin margins to be the cheapest version on the block, so they can spend more money on materials and design and the like. If you don't know clothes very well, it can be a shortcut to an actual, in person, feature by feature comparison in detail. This might mean being able to buy online, or only after visiting one store, instead of visiting a couple. At many income levels, it can make sense to spend money to save time.