The "specialness spiral" leads us to not use some ordinary objects (2021)

https://www.cnn.com/2021/10/06/health/specialness-spiral-partner-wellness/index.html

by Overtonwindow • 3 years ago

24 50 3 years ago

derekp7• 3 years ago

I'd like to see this explored a bit further, and compare both reusable items (such as "the good silverware" that you only bring out for holiday dinners), vs items that get used up (consumables). And in the case of consumables, is there differences between ones that are compose of 100% disposable components (such as a stack of stationary paper) or something that has a rather nice component, and then parts that get used up (like a bound hard cover Moleskin or Fields notebook).

For durable items (silverware, premium dishware) there is wear-and-tear that can dissuade daily use. But I think it is more that it makes the occasion itself feel more premium if you bring out the gold plated forks for that once a year meal, rather than concern over wearing that item out. On the other hand, for consumable items I think it is more of wanting to maximize the value from it (don't waste it on trivial things) rather than making the specific occasion more special.

voisin• 3 years ago

there is wear-and-tear that can dissuade daily use.

I like things made of materials that lend toward gaining a patina of use, becoming more attractive with wear and imperfection. Wabi-sabi.

wrp2• 3 years ago

Can you think of any restricted-use items that do not degrade with use, so that the cost/trouble of replacement is not an issue?

I don't think something like Christmas decorations would qualify. I don't use a hammer when I'm not pounding something and I don't use decorations when I'm not celebrating that holiday. "Restricted" would mean that you don't use it even in an appropriate situation.

dang• 3 years ago

Discussed at the time:

The 'specialness spiral:' Why we label ordinary objects as too special to use - https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=28771893 - Oct 2021 (79 comments)

wrp2• 3 years ago

I think her experiment with the notebooks is misleading. This is a well known issue among stationery enthusiasts, that you are afraid to begin using a nice notebook because it means committing it to a specific use. People buy Moleskines or the like and are afraid to start using then. I got around that problem by switching to spiral notebooks, so I could tear out used pages and start a new task "fresh".

throwanem2• 3 years ago

I've never understood this frame of mind. The notebook is a tool that's meant to be used. Part of learning to use a tool well is using it poorly, in order to learn what not to do. At least with a notebook you don't have to learn by missing the nail and not missing your thumb.

Also quite seriously: Moleskines are garbage. Poor bindings, shit paper, absurdly overpriced - I honestly don't know how they sleep at night. A Mnemosyne N195A is $9 or $10 from a reputable seller, and much better made with quality paper. Or, for the same money as a ripoff Moleskine, you can get an A5 Rhodia Webnotebook and have something so beautiful and palpably well made that it's at least understandable not wanting to sully it with use. (But if you do get one, write in it anyway, dammit! The only way you misuse a notebook is to let it sit gathering dust.)

pavlov• 3 years ago

At least for people with a designer/artist mindset, it's the fear of the blank canvas.

People have an idealized end state in their mind: buying the notebook they imagine what its pages could look like a year from now, filled with insightful notes and breezy sketches. By committing something to paper on the first page, they're breaking that mental image. The notebook of their dreams won't exist and something mediocre is inevitably creeping in its place.

jiggawatts3• 3 years ago

I saw a talk where the gist was that objects are made to be used. They serve us, we don't serve them. A device or a tool will never thank you for taking care of it.

An example is that professional photographers don't "baby" their cameras. The corners are dinged, everything is worn, and they pick them up in one hand without putting the strap around their neck to stop it falling. If it's too fragile to use, it's too fragile.

My application of this philosophy is that I don't put a protective case on my iPhone. I typically buy the most expensive model, and I have dropped them, and even scratched the screen.

But here's the thing: the bare phone is beautiful. It has a very well designed glass and metal body. It's shiny. It's elegant. It's as small as it can be made.

If you put a plastic cover on it, the phone gets bigger, heavier, and uglier. You're sacrificing something (usability, comfort, appearance) for the benefit of the device, not for your own benefit.

PS: Everyone I know who has a protective case on their phone has broken the screen at least once. Typically they just get it repaired for ~$100 and then... they still have their unblemished pretty phone again, which they put back inside an ugly case.

mtsr• 3 years ago

There’s a big difference here between people who can afford to replace the phone and those who can’t. And the way they’re marketed makes it really hard for some folks to buy anything but the latest and greatest, anyway.

danbruc• 3 years ago

I would hope that it is not only being able to afford a replacement, taking care of your stuff not only saves money but also avoids waste and saves resources.

ornornor2• 3 years ago

I put my (slippery) iPhones in cases because if I don’t they stop working. Your phone might not care that its screen is cracked but I very much do mind not being able to read the display and have to pay several hundreds to put it back the way it was vs spending 20$ or less on a case and screen protector so I can keep the original display intact and get 5-6 years of use out of the device.

When I drop it, I just have to swap the screen protector (a 2$ consumable you can buy on aliexpress) which takes 10 minutes vs having to pay 100x as much and wait a few days to get my phone back to swap displays (and maybe get a knockoff display with inferior performance)

IMHO it’s just wasteful not to spend so little time and money to make the device last several years longer.

benjaminl• 3 years ago

I also buy the most expensive Apple phone and not put it in a case. My experience is quite different from your, perhaps unintentional straw man. Let’s take this assertion by assertion.

I put my (slippery) iPhones in cases because if I don’t they stop working. Your phone might not care that its screen is cracked

I would be hugely bothered by a cracked screen or an otherwise non-operative screen. But Apple’s Pro level phones feature steel cases. This makes the phone very robust. I have yet to crack or otherwise damage my phone.

have to pay several hundreds to put it back the way it was vs spending 20$ or less on a case and screen protector

Always get AppleCare Plus. It serves as my screen protector. If I ever did crack my screen service fee to fix a broken screen is $29.

which takes 10 minutes vs having to pay 100x as much and wait a few days to get my phone back to swap displays

As per above the price difference between a case and AppleCare is minimal close to 0x as much.

And it doesn’t take days to have your screen replaced. Apple stores will do it in minutes within the space of a single service appointment.

iPhones are truly works of art and should be enjoyed without cheap plastic cases. Just make sure you have AppleCare Plus.

vladvasiliu2• 3 years ago

As others have said, there's also a question of practicality.

My iPhone 7 is slippery as hell. Even if money were no object and I had a stack of 100 spare ones, I would still absolutely hate for it to break when I'm randomly out and about just because it slipped from my hand.

Even just taking 30 minutes or however long to move everything to a new one would be a nuisance, let alone having to go to the apple store or wait for a delivery. I just want my phone to get out of my way. I don't use it often, but when I do, I want it to work right then and there.

Taking the 10 seconds to install a non-slippery cover helps tremendously with that.

I think there is a definite difference between babying something and being absolutely reckless with it. It may also depend on the device. My galaxy s5 wouldn't slip from my hands, so I didn't bother with a cover. I would also buy an iphone "rugged" instead of a "slim" if it were an option.

theelous3• 3 years ago

for the benefit of the device, not for your own benefit.

I'm sure someone else has already brought this up, but I feel remit to point out that the benefit to not damaging very expensive items is that the items were not expensive to themselves, but to the owner. There is a risk and cost analysis, in which adding a case is almost always worth it unless you are an edge case user like yourself.

What benefits the device benefits the owner, with 1:1 parity in the metric.

okasaki• 3 years ago

I'm not sure these are good examples.

Casual photographers don't baby their cameras. They simply don't know the abuse tolerance their camera has as well as professionals that use them every day. It's perfectly reasonable to be careful with expensive tools that you aren't used to.

Phones are different of course, but mine is slippery and uncomfortable to use. A plastic case actually enhances its usability, as well as protects it.

Phemist2• 3 years ago

Without a case, my samsung A51, when lying on the screen-side, simply slides off the table after a while. Any table.

Not sure what the mechanism of action is here, but I guess it's too smooth?...

HPsquared2• 3 years ago

I need to baby the phone if I don't have a case and screen protector. Need to take care because if it drops, it breaks. Even keys and grains of grit are hazards.

On the other hand with a good case, I can be more carefree. Lightly hold onto it with fewer fingers, throw it onto tables, use it as a hammer, etc. It gains robustness, which is valuable.

rkangel• 3 years ago

You should be careful to consider your privilege when judging other people's decisions here. This is an absolutely reasonable choice on your part, but you're (a) buying the most expensive model (and I'd guess doing so on a 2 year cycle), and then (b) paying for Apple care for it. That's a reasonable amount of money to spend for a shiny iPhone, a perfectly reasonable amount in your case.

For other people though, it might not be worth it or affordable at all. If one $30 case saves paying Apple care, or if helps use the phone for three or four years rather than two then that is a significant financial saving.

10u152• 3 years ago

Please don’t encourage stifling of discussion by invoking privilege. This person gave an opinion that contributes to the discourse. Self censorship is a slippery slope, especially in this context.

jiggawatts3• 3 years ago

I can't afford a new camera right now, even though my current one is over a decade old, and I would really like a new one. My phone is also several years old and I can't afford to replace it on a whim either.

I make a fraction of what a typical IC in silicon valley might, and I'm not what you'd categorise as "rich" by any means. Middle class, more like.

My point is that I've seen people that only fly first-class put phones in plastic cases.

seer• 3 years ago

Been going without a case with the newer iphones and I must report their engineering is simply spectacular. A brand new iphone 14 flew off its stand from my motorbike riding 80 km/h on a Vietnamese highway. No case. It now has just a few scratches on the sides and thats about it. A few years ago, if my phone fell of the table I would expect it shatter, now it just dinged up a bit and still water proof, I'm honestly very impressed.

krisoft3• 3 years ago

I must report their engineering is simply spectacular.

I agree with your observation. Let me add my own anecdote: We were practicing a low-pass over a grassy runway with a cessna-150 when the door opened on its own. (It seemed to be a thing with that plane.) We got a radio call from the ground that they have seen something fall out of the airplane. We quickly checked everything starting with the engine instruments, when my instructor realised that his iphone which was previously wedged between his seat and the door is missing.

We landed, tried to find it but couldn’t. Days later a glider pilot spotted it during a landing. It got back to my instructor and turns out it was in perfect working order. (Altough i don’t remember if he had a protector case or not.)

dividedbyzero• 3 years ago

An example is that professional photographers don't "baby" their cameras. The corners are dinged, everything is worn, and they pick them up in one hand without putting the strap around their neck to stop it falling. If it's too fragile to use, it's too fragile.

A professional photographer will have gear built to take that kind of abuse; most enthusiasts will not have that to the same degree (e.g. may have weatherproofing, but not to the same standards), and professionals will have insurance in case that goes wrong (and backups for the most important pieces), and there's something tangible to gain from taking the risk (getting the shot, getting a better shot, delivering better value, ...)

But here's the thing: the bare phone is beautiful. It has a very well designed glass and metal body. It's shiny. It's elegant. It's as small as it can be made.

Phones are designed to be put into cases. They're as slim as possible at the expense of battery life, heat management and better hardware so they don't feel like bricks when put into a case because pretty much everyone will put them in one. My iPhone handles like crap without one, despite its sleek lines, and cases are actual fashion statements these days.

heavenlyblue• 3 years ago

Your philosophy is plain wrong because if you want to be in Apple ecosystem and you wanted a rugged phone, you would not get one without a case. And that's reasonable because a lot of cases would make a phone rugged in a modular fasion

PS: Everyone I know who has a protective case on their phone has broken the screen at least once. Typically they just get it repaired for ~$100 and then... they still have their unblemished pretty phone again, which they put back inside an ugly case.

That's just simply not true. I regularly hang out in a circle of rollerbladers who use their iPhones in the worst conditions, where they would most certainly not survive for even a week if not for cases.

Dalewyn• 3 years ago

A device or a tool will never thank you for taking care of it.

It will thank you by not failing when you need it most.

A proper craftsman takes care of his tools. Yes, they're banged up from many years of use, but they are otherwise in good state of upkeep. They are also never deliberately abused.

If a "craftsman's" tools are in a badly kept state, he's not worth your time or money to hire.

chickenimprint2• 3 years ago

Professionals have worn gear because they know how to handle it without breaking. Looks like you extracted the wrong lesson from photographers.

jiggawatts3• 3 years ago

Did I?

I took better photos by putting my camera into places where it could (and did!) take a little damage.

Its purpose is to take photos, not to remain pristine.

Broken_Hippo• 3 years ago

Items might be made to be used, but it doesn't mean they are well designed for the average lifestyle. This is what you get with a phone. It might be beautiful, but they definitely aren't designed for modern life, to be used with slippery gloves while riding public transportation (for example).

My case literally has small chunks missing from a few plastic bits. If my case didn't take the direct impact, my phone would have. I don't buy the most expensive models, and I do want the phone to last as long as possible. Not taking care of it seems wasteful, and care - with my lifestyle - means having a case.

shisisms• 3 years ago

Love the point around the iPhone in particular. Part of the joy of the object is using it naked, feels as it should and what a joy that is.

Putting a beautiful work of art in bubble wrapping May we’ll protect it, but would diminish its joy, beauty and sheer pleasure to that of bubble wrap.

smusamashah• 3 years ago

I buy phones, computers for what's inside them. For the outside they have to be good enough. They sure need have a high quality display. But that's it.

I bought my current phone (pixel) and the previous one (pixel) very cheap from ebay, both with a cracks on screen, current one has broken corner. No protective casing. These don't hinder me in any way. Cracks are barely visible when phone is on. In early days of phones, I use to have a phone with a tape around it because back cover was loose and battery use to fall of.

Only I consider buying new electronic items like these is the uncertainty of if it will work well and how much life they might have left in them.

Fatnino• 3 years ago

I typically stick to lower midrange phones. I absolutely prioritize functionality over looks. Don't care what it looks like at all as long as the screen isn't cracked. I've dropped and broken several and the cost to repair was not competitive with buying a new phone. Since then I keep my phone in a protective case mainly for the extra bumper space around the screen and I have a sacrificial glass screen protector installed. I've dropped this phone countless times and gone through 4 screen protectors while the actual phone keeps working fine. I don't even remember what color the back of the phone is under the case and I don't care. This is the phone I've used the longest and I now find myself in the strange (to me) position where I'm looking to buy a new phone not because the old one broke but because it's old enough that it feels slow.

jl6• 3 years ago

As discussed on TVTropes:

https://tvtropes.org/pmwiki/pmwiki.php/Main/TooAwesomeToUse

mrob• 3 years ago

The same effect can keep you from getting the full value from objects. For example, you are allowed to write in your own books. If adding annotations helps you learn faster, that's probably worth more than the possible loss in value of the book. There might not even be any loss of value if somebody agrees your annotations are useful. And how often do you sell books anyway? There's also no schoolteacher waiting to put you in detention for vandalizing school property.

ben30• 3 years ago

The "endowment effect." It is the tendency for people to ascribe more value to things merely because they own them. This can make it difficult for people to part with their possessions, even if they are not using them or do not need them. The endowment effect has been observed in various contexts, from consumer behavior to negotiations and auctions.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Endowment_effect

omnicognate2• 3 years ago

I have an extremely nice Crombie overcoat that cost north of £1000. I wear it every day.

I've always liked to have a coat of that sort of style in the winter, and have usually ended up buying a new one each year. They get a beating, as I wear them throughout the winter, workdays and weekends, and I generally only have one. It's a second skin. Coats usually can't stand up to that for long.

I'm reaching the end of the third winter with the Crombie and it looks as good as new. It has always looked way better than any coat I've had. On several occasions random passers-by have commented on it, and I live in London where people generally don't do that sort of thing. It is a really rather fabulous coat, and I love wearing it.

The thing is, after 3 winters the average cost of this coat per winter is now about the same as that of all the other coats I've bought over the years. Probably a bit less. As it weathers a few more years, which I'm confident it will, it will become cheaper than them.

My father has a Crombie that I think he's worn like twice. What's the point?

Buy well made, hardwearing clothes (if you can find them), and wear them. You and the world will be better off for it.

adammarples• 3 years ago

I think the hard wearing thing gets overplayed somewhat. I've never had a coat get destroyed in one year, except a cheap one once on a hard ski season. Pretty much any old thing lasts years and years if you're just walking around in it, maybe needing elbow patches or patched lining after a few years. I see people buy these "bag for life" overbuilt things with leather and toggles and stuff and yet my £10 polyester backpack has never broken. Shoes/boots are the exception, you will wear through the sole quickly.

omnicognate2• 3 years ago

That depends on what you want from your clothes. I like to dress smartly and prefer not to wear a coat that is visibly battered, even if it's comfortable and warm. You can make a valid moral argument that one should sacrifice sartorial preferences in favour of giving a garment a long life, but I get the same environmental benefit without making that sacrifice by buying a well made coat that continues to look new for years.

Those who don't much care about appearances won't make the same choice, and that's absolutely fine. There is of course a prominent contingent on hn who think dressing smartly and spending money on nice things are both somehow immoral in and of themselves, but I have no time for them.

askvictor• 3 years ago

Have recently been considering this regarding merino (or any other wool) clothing. If you treat it 'special' and keep it in the wardrobe, chances are, moths will ruin it. But if you wear it regularly, they won't (unless you have a _bad_ infestation)

nicbou• 3 years ago

I remember when my mom got her first new car, and suddenly we parked at the end of the lot to avoid other people's doors scratching the paint.

I drive an old economy shit box that I beat like a rented mule. I'm indifferent to dings and scratches. It has been raced more than most Porsches. It cost the tenth of the price of one. I put the rest of the money into driving it to interesting places.

I took my not-adventure-bike halfway around the world and back with the money I didn't spend on a BMW. I shrugged after every fall, because it's not a BMW.

Tools are meant to be used. If you can't use them as you please, you have the wrong tools.

The "specialness spiral" leads us to not use some ordinary objects (2021)

Related Stories