If you can read this, either the style sheet didn't load or you have an older browser that doesn't support style sheets. Try clearing your browser cache and refreshing the page.

(Slate)   Lifehacking actually ruins your life   (slate.com) divider line 86
    More: Ironic, buzzwords  
•       •       •

19439 clicks; posted to Main » on 29 Jul 2013 at 12:23 PM (37 weeks ago)   |  Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook   more»



86 Comments   (+0 »)
   
View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest
 
2013-07-29 11:24:54 AM
canadasrock.ca

Far out.

/did like the Oblomov reference
//From the intro of my copy: The character is "archetypically characteristic of an ultimate, not to say pathological, lethargy, a laziness raised to the level of such majestic dimensions it has something in common with religious zealotry or political fanaticism ..."
 
2013-07-29 11:32:42 AM
Using the word "lifehack" should be a punchable offense.
 
2013-07-29 12:23:49 PM
Lucky for me I have no idea what that means.
 
2013-07-29 12:25:48 PM

Thoguh: Using the word "lifehack" should be a punchable offense.


That.
 
2013-07-29 12:28:59 PM
I am sure Lifehacker.com will close up shop now.
 
2013-07-29 12:35:50 PM
Lifehacker loves to make bold claims on little evidence, so.. Yeah.

/it's a gawker site.
 
2013-07-29 12:37:21 PM
Slave better shut his whore mouth and get back to work if he knows what's good for him.
 
2013-07-29 12:37:59 PM

MadSkillz: Lifehacker loves to make bold claims on little evidence, so.. Yeah.

/it's a gawker site.


YOU CAN BE A SUCCESS IF YOU DO THESE 6,331 THINGS

IN ORDER
 
2013-07-29 12:40:01 PM

Crewmannumber6: Lucky for me I have no idea what that means.


It's just a word people who think they're smarter than everyone else use for doing mundane things like recycling old toilet paper rolls.
 
2013-07-29 12:40:30 PM
Damn, I always thought life hacking was using old soda bottles to seal bags and the like.
 
2013-07-29 12:40:35 PM

Thoguh: Using the word "lifehack" should be a punchable offense.


Along with 'multitasking.'  Both are the same way of micromanaging time.
 
2013-07-29 12:41:47 PM

Thoguh: Using the word "lifehack" should be a punchable offense.


Synonymous with "by using this one weird trick".
 
2013-07-29 12:42:23 PM

NorCalLos: Crewmannumber6: Lucky for me I have no idea what that means.

It's just a word people who think they're smarter than everyone else use for doing mundane things like recycling old toilet paper rolls.


Go ahead and stamp my form, sonny, because I don't give a shiat.

/oh, and you're right
 
2013-07-29 12:42:48 PM

PartTimeBuddha: MadSkillz: Lifehacker loves to make bold claims on little evidence, so.. Yeah.

/it's a gawker site.

YOU CAN BE A SUCCESS IF YOU DO THESE 6,331 THINGS

IN ORDER


Also: "Uhhhh I'd be super rich if I did this too, but I don't want to do it, I want to help YOU! Also my friends and family aren't super rich...because I don't want to help them, I want to help YOU. Give me money."
 
2013-07-29 12:42:49 PM
Dammit, I left my hipster-to-English translator app at home.
 
2013-07-29 12:45:29 PM

Thoguh: Using the word "lifehack" should be a punchable offense.

 
2013-07-29 12:48:26 PM
Ironic because listening to Slate ruins your life too.
 
2013-07-29 12:48:57 PM
I have friends at work who have bought all into this and read the books etc for how to get more things done with their life and achieve Total Victory.  They are tired, depressed, and get less done than before.
 
2013-07-29 12:49:29 PM
But what about the lifehack-a-Shaq? Are those still good?
 
2013-07-29 12:50:17 PM
Every technological advance pitched as a way to save time, increase efficiency, and take a load off of workers, in the history of time, winds up making workers work harder for less.

Cotton gin, assembly line, computers, internet, etc.

If it lets you get more done in less time, you're expected to have more total output, not the same output in less time.  Always.  Since forever.
 
2013-07-29 12:51:09 PM
Very happy I have never heard this stupid phrase before.
 
2013-07-29 12:51:42 PM
everyone needs a hobby.
 
2013-07-29 12:51:48 PM

Thoguh: Using the word "lifehack" should be a punchable offense.


Eh, the term is apropos. A hack is inherently dangerous (think duct tape and power tools). A practitioner of a lifehack should be punished for their hubris soon enough. I'm only left wondering where all the lifehackfailblogs are.
 
2013-07-29 12:54:31 PM
Jorge Cham does an excellent job covering this in his Procrastination lectures: 1)we're often more productive while avoiding the things that we're supposed to be doing and 2) a lot of people never seem to have free time because they're either over budgeting their time(trying to do too much) or waste the free time they do have.
 
2013-07-29 12:58:34 PM
There should be no "lifehacking enthisiasts." If you're taking the time you free up with your lifehacks, and use it to look for things to HACK MOAR, you have missed the point entirely. It's supposed to be a means to an end, not an end in itself.

But lifehacks aren't just for optimizing your life; you can use them to straighten out your life. Think about it: you're a Farker. There are, no doubt, some important things that you've let fall by the wayside. I don't know what they are, but you do. And you know you need to deal with these, but you've had trouble Just Doing Them back into your life. This is where lifehacks can really be helpful: they break the psychological associations that hold you back, partly merely by being different, but also by holding the promise of working better than your "old" method. And sometimes, that's enough.

Seriously. Give it a shot: rather than taking something already in your life and hacking it to make it better, take something that fell out of your life and hack it back in. It really helps.
 
2013-07-29 01:01:57 PM

lewismarktwo: Damn, I always thought life hacking was using old soda bottles to seal bags and the like.


That's what I thought too.  Also using the dustpan to fill a bucket.
 
2013-07-29 01:04:01 PM
No subby, Tvtropes will ruin your life.

imgs.xkcd.com
 
2013-07-29 01:06:16 PM

Combustion: PartTimeBuddha: MadSkillz: Lifehacker loves to make bold claims on little evidence, so.. Yeah.

/it's a gawker site.

YOU CAN BE A SUCCESS IF YOU DO THESE 6,331 THINGS

IN ORDER

Also: "Uhhhh I'd be super rich if I did this too, but I don't want to do it, I want to help YOU! Also my friends and family aren't super rich...because I don't want to help them, I want to help YOU. Give me money."


Woah, really?  Do you take PayPal or should I just give you my credit card?

/by using this one weird trick
 
2013-07-29 01:06:26 PM
Does this mean I should get rid of my washer and dryer and spend my weekends beating my clothes against rocks.
 
2013-07-29 01:08:40 PM
Does this mean I should get rid of my washer and dryer and spend my weekends beating my clothes against rocks.


Ask your life coach.
 
2013-07-29 01:09:56 PM

Millennium: There should be no "lifehacking enthisiasts." If you're taking the time you free up with your lifehacks, and use it to look for things to HACK MOAR, you have missed the point entirely. It's supposed to be a means to an end, not an end in itself.

But lifehacks aren't just for optimizing your life; you can use them to straighten out your life. Think about it: you're a Farker. There are, no doubt, some important things that you've let fall by the wayside. I don't know what they are, but you do. And you know you need to deal with these, but you've had trouble Just Doing Them back into your life. This is where lifehacks can really be helpful: they break the psychological associations that hold you back, partly merely by being different, but also by holding the promise of working better than your "old" method. And sometimes, that's enough.

Seriously. Give it a shot: rather than taking something already in your life and hacking it to make it better, take something that fell out of your life and hack it back in. It really helps.


This.  I have a read a few books about motivation and getting things done.  What they do is convince me to do what I already knew.  But the only time they actually work is when they change my perspective.  Sometimes they do that by giving me a mindset change, sometimes by breaking old associations.  And if going on a LifeHack site shows me how to get the ONE STUPID THING out of the way that's been preventing me from doing everything else normally, I win.  As long as I don't try to solve a bunch of problems I don't have, I'm ahead.  It's like walking away from a Casino table.  Recognize when you're ahead or you never will be.
 
2013-07-29 01:16:16 PM

Dafatone: Every technological advance pitched as a way to save time, increase efficiency, and take a load off of workers, in the history of time, winds up making workers work harder for less.

Cotton gin, assembly line, computers, internet, etc.

If it lets you get more done in less time, you're expected to have more total output, not the same output in less time.  Always.  Since forever.


Damn you, human progress!
 
2013-07-29 01:18:54 PM

Guntram Shatterhand: Thoguh: Using the word "lifehack" should be a punchable offense.

Along with 'multitasking.'  Both are the same way of micromanaging time.


Actually, the original idea of multi-tasking was more like batching in computer science. It means you do something else only when the IO system kicks in (IO is thousands of times slower than CPU).

Basically means, you keep doing one thing until you reach a point where you need someone else's input or some interruption you can't control, you switch tasks.

So, the original idea behind multi-tasking was to switch to another task until your portion is done instead of twiddling your thumbs and fixating on a single task. Not, the modern equivalent of juggling ten tasks at the same time.
 
2013-07-29 01:19:56 PM
I've always hated the term lifehacking.  Most people would call it common sense.  99% of them are about as brilliant as reusing old coffee cans to store spare nuts and bolts.
 
2013-07-29 01:20:40 PM
Hey, look at me! I have a wildly differing opinion than the rest of the world and here to tell you that you're doing everything all wrong. Just looooooook at meeeeeee!!!
 
2013-07-29 01:24:09 PM
img.gawkerassets.com

This is a lifehack. Pretty scary stuff, I know.

The author article is... reaching. Maybe so is the Gawker site that claims that lifehacks are anything but cute little tricks/shortcuts like the one pictured.

But really, I think we're gonna be okay.
 
2013-07-29 01:26:21 PM

puppetmaster745: Dafatone: Every technological advance pitched as a way to save time, increase efficiency, and take a load off of workers, in the history of time, winds up making workers work harder for less.

Cotton gin, assembly line, computers, internet, etc.

If it lets you get more done in less time, you're expected to have more total output, not the same output in less time.  Always.  Since forever.

Damn you, human progress!


Damned cotton gin.
 
2013-07-29 01:32:48 PM
Here are useful LIFEHACKS... or as I'd like to call them... Poor people's tricks to living:
bp.uuuploads.com
Are you a janitor at a crappy job that does not have a mop sink?   LIFEHACK!

bp2.uuuploads.com
Can you not afford a keychain holder?  Do you find yourself walking around tennis courts looking for lost balls in your spare time?   LIFEHACK!

img.photobucket.com

Do you live in a third world country with limited resources?   LIFEHACK!
 
2013-07-29 01:38:36 PM

Millennium: There should be no "lifehacking enthisiasts." If you're taking the time you free up with your lifehacks, and use it to look for things to HACK MOAR, you have missed the point entirely. It's supposed to be a means to an end, not an end in itself.

But lifehacks aren't just for optimizing your life; you can use them to straighten out your life. Think about it: you're a Farker. There are, no doubt, some important things that you've let fall by the wayside. I don't know what they are, but you do. And you know you need to deal with these, but you've had trouble Just Doing Them back into your life. This is where lifehacks can really be helpful: they break the psychological associations that hold you back, partly merely by being different, but also by holding the promise of working better than your "old" method. And sometimes, that's enough.

Seriously. Give it a shot: rather than taking something already in your life and hacking it to make it better, take something that fell out of your life and hack it back in. It really helps.




Kinda agree with you.

The article doesn't say lifehacking ruins your life. It says creativity is different than productivity and creativity hacks are probably different than productivity hacks.

Right now tools like personal metrics and such are a lot of trouble but sometimes they are worth the trouble. For example, keeping a food journal if you have weight issues or a pedometer to measure how active you were that day. In the future, I think everyone will use personal metrics - even Apple is in the iWatch personal metrics game.
 
2013-07-29 01:38:44 PM
It seems to me like it's pretty straightforward. You see these ideas, some are obvious and trivial, others are deeper changes, so you think "hey, that would work for me and my situation, I'm going to do that", then you do it, and if it doesn't help, you stop doing it. 4 out of 5 times, it's not relevant anyway.

I get my work done, and I use my calendar to help remind me when to stop working, when to eat dinner so I don't get sidetracked with something that interests me, and end up eating too late and thereby run out of quiet evening time, when to hit the gym, etc. I use Evernote to store things I know are of interest and will be useful later, like my timesheets, favorite news articles, screenshots, travel plans, spectacular Gianna Michaels videos. I use Feedly to scream through a few magazines and newspapers I want to read when I wake up, but I don't use it as an excuse to read things I wouldn't want to read otherwise. If you're using productivity strategies and tools to make room for things that make your life worse, you're doing it wrong. You should use them to accomplish the things that make your life better, and find ways to eliminate the rest.
 
2013-07-29 01:39:54 PM
farking moron article author... The Tim Ferris brand of lifehacking is about the workarounds that allow you more free time and hopefully separate location and schedule from your income. It's not about working 24/7, that's what you have fulfillment houses and websites for.

I think Taleb's Antifragile is a sleeper lifehacker book. It doesn't sell itself as a self improvement book but it's got a bit of stoic philosophy and the attitude needed.  Work intensely for a brief period, become truly free, and don't suffer fools lightly.
 
2013-07-29 01:52:59 PM
i.imgur.com
 
2013-07-29 01:55:17 PM

big pig peaches: Does this mean I should get rid of my washer and dryer and spend my weekends beating my clothes against rocks.


No it means you should spend $50,000 and all your free time for the next three years building a robot that beats your clothes against rocks, then spend another $50,000 and all your free time for another three years improving the robot until it can perform your laundry chores for you. After six years and $100,000 dollars spend it will then break down and you will do your own dam laundry freeing up your time to notice your wife left you, your kid is pregnant, and the dog died.
 
2013-07-29 02:00:13 PM

NostroZ: Here are useful LIFEHACKS... or as I'd like to call them... Poor people's tricks to living:
[bp.uuuploads.com image 605x807]
Are you a janitor at a crappy job that does not have a mop sink?   LIFEHACK!

[bp2.uuuploads.com image 605x435]
Can you not afford a keychain holder?  Do you find yourself walking around tennis courts looking for lost balls in your spare time?   LIFEHACK!

[img.photobucket.com image 576x432]

Do you live in a third world country with limited resources?   LIFEHACK!


That is stupid. A funnel and hose would be more practical and flexible solution and there a bazillion and one hooks for walls solutions out there. In the end you would get your dustpan wet and have neon green blobs all around your room.

In a third world country, you wouldn't have a sink with running water.
 
2013-07-29 02:06:24 PM
I am embarrassed anyone had to read that article.
 
2013-07-29 02:10:01 PM
Is "life hack" like spit and bailing wire, or more like a death rattle?
 
2013-07-29 02:11:13 PM
One interesting "like hack" I read about was how to get an elevator to go directly to your floor without stopping. Of course, you can only do it if you're the only person on the elevator and it kind of makes you a self-absorbed asshat to do it when it does work. And since I haven't had a chance to try it out, I don't even know if it works at all.

/csb
 
2013-07-29 02:11:22 PM
wildcardjack:  Work intensely for a brief period, become truly free, and don't suffer fools lightly.

My wife says I'm being an asshole when I follow this advice.

/usually very polite these days
//trick is to not letting them know you're being an asshole
 
2013-07-29 02:14:22 PM
We shot an infomercial at Tim Ferriss's crib in SF a few years back. Nice enough guy. The thrust was to illustrate how technology would enable us to get more done in less time or some shiat like that.After we wrapped out, our producer received a call from a frantic Tim who was all upset that his wallet had gone missing. Everyone in the car (I didn't really know the production team yet) looked at Biscuits because tattoos and a general scruffy appearance all around. Tim called back a few minutes later to apologize and to let us know that the wallet had turned up./csb
 
2013-07-29 02:14:42 PM

mr0x: In a third world country, you wouldn't have a sink with running water.


The Borat "Great Success" is the general theory of lifehacking... do you own a wife and have an unplowed field?
Attach plow to your woman... Great Success with LIFEHACK!

www.demotivationalposters.org

abcnews.go.com
 
2013-07-29 02:16:41 PM
Lifehacking Tip:

Masturbate in the shower.

Lotion-soaps as lube, all right there where you need 'em;
Shoot it anywhere you like, no spill worries;
Easy cleanup - you're already in there for a shower.


It's going to save millions of man-hours which can be applied to building a better Homeland.
 
2013-07-29 02:47:55 PM

DubtodaIll: Thoguh: Using the word "lifehack" should be a punchable offense.

That.


My new "strategy" is simple and efficient: if you say "lifehack" out loud in my presence I will "axehack" you until you stop.

I'm not unreasonable, I will make exceptions for people who only said the word because they were quoting someone else or commenting on how awful the word is.
 
2013-07-29 02:51:53 PM

SovietCanuckistan: Thoguh: Using the word "lifehack" should be a punchable offense.

Synonymous with "by using this one weird trick".


If we're gonna talk pet peeves (and honestly, what ELSE is this thread for), the one that really makes my eyes twitch painfully is "hate" as in ads that say "Doctors HATE her!" to promote some health product.

I'm not even sure what would be a suitable punishment for that, but I'm reasonably certain that both flames and stinging insects are involved.
 
2013-07-29 02:59:06 PM
I hate when people say "the definition of insanity is doing the same thing over and over and expecting a different result." If that's the case, what is the word for people who are unable to think rationally? Anyone who repeats this trope should be kicked in the package as a result of saying it until they stop.
 
2013-07-29 03:07:49 PM

ciberido: SovietCanuckistan: Thoguh: Using the word "lifehack" should be a punchable offense.

Synonymous with "by using this one weird trick".

If we're gonna talk pet peeves (and honestly, what ELSE is this thread for), the one that really makes my eyes twitch painfully is "hate" as in ads that say "Doctors HATE her!" to promote some health product.

I'm not even sure what would be a suitable punishment for that, but I'm reasonably certain that both flames and stinging insects are involved.


I know a suitable punishment. It's a weird trick, actually.
 
2013-07-29 03:13:26 PM

NorCalLos: I hate when people say "the definition of insanity is doing the same thing over and over and expecting a different result." If that's the case, what is the word for people who are unable to think rationally? Anyone who repeats this trope should be kicked in the package as a result of saying it until they stop.


Funny how saying that phrase doesn't really ever seem to change much.
 
2013-07-29 03:40:00 PM
As "lifehacking" becomes an industry with its own blogs and book-length guides

Because "Hints from Heloise" never happened. No one has ever had "useful tips".

/another "quality" article from Slate
 
2013-07-29 03:43:43 PM
/420
 
2013-07-29 03:43:59 PM
Sline:
img.gawkerassets.com

How is this more useful than standing up the bottles?
 
2013-07-29 03:48:04 PM

ArcadianRefugee: Sline:
[img.gawkerassets.com image 320x253]

How is this more useful than standing up the bottles?


assets.nydailynews.com
 
2013-07-29 04:02:14 PM

ArcadianRefugee: Sline:
[img.gawkerassets.com image 320x253]

How is this more useful than standing up the bottles?


Dont have to raise a shelf halfway up the fridge to fit bottles under, also if you drink more than one kind of beer you can get different ones out without having to dig in the back and probably knocking a bunch over.
 
2013-07-29 04:22:29 PM

Cyno01: ArcadianRefugee: Sline:
[img.gawkerassets.com image 320x253]

How is this more useful than standing up the bottles?

Dont have to raise a shelf halfway up the fridge to fit bottles under, also if you drink more than one kind of beer you can get different ones out without having to dig in the back and probably knocking a bunch over.


Ya, but how much space do you need in the fridge? There's only so much been you can drink in one sitting.
 
2013-07-29 04:45:03 PM

ArcadianRefugee


How is this more useful than standing up the bottles?


The bottles are more stable. On a wire shelf like that, the narrow base of the bottles can be a problem.

Those binder clips also work well on potato chip bags, as a good way to keep video/network/power cables in place, and as a quick method to splint a broken finger.

Okay, I made that last one up but the other two are valid.
 
2013-07-29 04:45:32 PM

Dafatone: Every technological advance pitched as a way to save time, increase efficiency, and take a load off of workers, in the history of time, winds up making workers work harder for less.

Cotton gin, assembly line, computers, internet, etc.

If it lets you get more done in less time, you're expected to have more total output, not the same output in less time.  Always.  Since forever.


My favorite example of the is laundry.  Automatic washing machines were touted as saving time.  But we spend just as much time doing laundry each week as we need before they were invented.  It's just that the standard of "acceptably clean clothing" has adjusted.
 
2013-07-29 04:50:50 PM

ciberido: My favorite example of the is laundry.  Automatic washing machines were touted as saving time.  But we spend just as much time doing laundry each week as we need before they were invented.  It's just that the standard of "acceptably clean clothing" has adjusted.


If you do nothing else while the machine is running, sure...
 
2013-07-29 04:53:25 PM

ciberido: Dafatone: Every technological advance pitched as a way to save time, increase efficiency, and take a load off of workers, in the history of time, winds up making workers work harder for less.

Cotton gin, assembly line, computers, internet, etc.

If it lets you get more done in less time, you're expected to have more total output, not the same output in less time.  Always.  Since forever.

My favorite example of the is laundry.  Automatic washing machines were touted as saving time.  But we spend just as much time doing laundry each week as we need before they were invented.  It's just that the standard of "acceptably clean clothing" has adjusted.


Maybe for you it has.

25.media.tumblr.com
 
2013-07-29 05:52:19 PM

ciberido: Dafatone: Every technological advance pitched as a way to save time, increase efficiency, and take a load off of workers, in the history of time, winds up making workers work harder for less.

Cotton gin, assembly line, computers, internet, etc.

If it lets you get more done in less time, you're expected to have more total output, not the same output in less time.  Always.  Since forever.

My favorite example of the is laundry.  Automatic washing machines were touted as saving time.  But we spend just as much time doing laundry each week as we need before they were invented.  It's just that the standard of "acceptably clean clothing" has adjusted.


Let me guess.  You're the type that will put his/her clothes in the washer/dryer and then just sit and stare at it until it's done?

I've never manually washed my clothes to compare the times, but I'd bet that washing a load of clothes by hand takes longer than the 10-20 seconds it takes to load the machine, add soap, and press a button.
 
2013-07-29 06:03:19 PM

drop: ciberido: Dafatone: Every technological advance pitched as a way to save time, increase efficiency, and take a load off of workers, in the history of time, winds up making workers work harder for less.

Cotton gin, assembly line, computers, internet, etc.

If it lets you get more done in less time, you're expected to have more total output, not the same output in less time.  Always.  Since forever.

My favorite example of the is laundry.  Automatic washing machines were touted as saving time.  But we spend just as much time doing laundry each week as we need before they were invented.  It's just that the standard of "acceptably clean clothing" has adjusted.

Let me guess.  You're the type that will put his/her clothes in the washer/dryer and then just sit and stare at it until it's done?

I've never manually washed my clothes to compare the times, but I'd bet that washing a load of clothes by hand takes longer than the 10-20 seconds it takes to load the machine, add soap, and press a button.


Washing by hand doesn't take long at all, especially when you own two shirts.  Five minutes, tops, then hang it up.  But we have a lot more clothing now, which is both a cause and an effect of the washing machine.  And, as someone mentioned before, some idiots don't like their women to look like Christina Ricci in Black Snake Moan.  Some people also do not like the natural smell of humans.  (When they're healthy, I actually rather like it--but not "four cloves of garlic" healthy; there is such a thing as overdoing it.)
 
2013-07-29 06:13:31 PM
Five minutes "tops" is still 15 times longer than it takes me.  I can go from two shirts to four to six to a dozen and it still only takes 20 seconds.  How long does it take you?

I don't see the argument you're trying to make, and you're certainly not supporting the position that it takes "just as long" now to wash clothes as it used to in ye olde daies, because it's patently untrue -- for any number of clothing items, from one to fifty.
 
2013-07-29 06:23:20 PM

drop: ciberido: Dafatone: Every technological advance pitched as a way to save time, increase efficiency, and take a load off of workers, in the history of time, winds up making workers work harder for less.

Cotton gin, assembly line, computers, internet, etc.

If it lets you get more done in less time, you're expected to have more total output, not the same output in less time.  Always.  Since forever.

My favorite example of the is laundry.  Automatic washing machines were touted as saving time.  But we spend just as much time doing laundry each week as we need before they were invented.  It's just that the standard of "acceptably clean clothing" has adjusted.

Let me guess.  You're the type that will put his/her clothes in the washer/dryer and then just sit and stare at it until it's done?

I've never manually washed my clothes to compare the times, but I'd bet that washing a load of clothes by hand takes longer than the 10-20 seconds it takes to load the machine, add soap, and press a button.


Since this is the second time in this thread this bizzare accusation has been aimed at me, I guess I should respond:

First off, no, I do not watch my clothes being washed.

Second, no, outside of camping or trekking or bicycle touring, I never washed my own clothes by hand, so I'm no authority on how long washing clothes by hand takes.  I have lived in third-world countries were laundry was done by hand, but there I could pay someone else to wash my laundry for me.  I really couldn't tell you how much time they spent.

Third, I got the main point (that we spend as much time per week washing clothes now as we did before the washing machine was invented) off a website.  And no, I don't remember which website, because it didn't occur me at the time that anyone would take umbrage at such a simple fact.  But here and here are two websites that give you an idea of how much time we spend doing laundry today, if you really think it's worth arguing over, and here's something on laundry in the middle ages.

Fourth, I do have to wonder why people are offended by this claim.  However inaccurate it may be, why does it offend you two so much that you wish to attack me personally?  Is this spillover from arguing with your spouse about housework or something?
 
2013-07-29 06:24:22 PM

drop: Five minutes "tops" is still 15 times longer than it takes me.  I can go from two shirts to four to six to a dozen and it still only takes 20 seconds.  How long does it take you?

I don't see the argument you're trying to make, and you're certainly not supporting the position that it takes "just as long" now to wash clothes as it used to in ye olde daies, because it's patently untrue -- for any number of clothing items, from one to fifty.


Wow.  I never imagined anyone could be THIS defensive about laundry.  You have issues.
 
2013-07-29 06:31:44 PM

Wangiss: Washing by hand doesn't take long at all, especially when you own two shirts. Five minutes, tops, then hang it up.


Which would be awesome if you lived on your own. Years ago, though, you were washing for you, your husband, and the passel of kids you kept pumping out to help work the farm. "Five minutes" wouldn't cut it, especially if you had to walk a ways down to the river.

Now, you just pop the stuff in the machine and go do something else. Couldn't exactly go do the cooking or house cleaning while you were hand-washing your clothes.
 
2013-07-29 06:33:47 PM

ciberido: Fourth, I do have to wonder why people are offended by this claim.  However inaccurate it may be


You're saying you're not offended by inaccurate claims?  That doesn't sound particularly healthy for an individual or a species that intends to survive.  I wonder just as much about people who aren't offended by inaccuracies, misrepresentations, or outright deception.  Any rational being should be offended by such things, no matter how mundane the subject matter.
 
2013-07-29 06:33:47 PM

drop: Five minutes "tops" is still 15 times longer than it takes me.  I can go from two shirts to four to six to a dozen and it still only takes 20 seconds.  How long does it take you?

I don't see the argument you're trying to make, and you're certainly not supporting the position that it takes "just as long" now to wash clothes as it used to in ye olde daies, because it's patently untrue -- for any number of clothing items, from one to fifty.


Argument?  I was just stating a fact.  I'm not trying to threaten your way of life.  But if you want your favorite shirt clean so you can wear it again quickly (say, to an event after a baby puked on it), you can hand-launder it in one to two minutes in the sink and then tumble-dry it with a dry towel.  Then you get your shirt back in ten minutes instead of an hour, if that's all you need.  There are times when you need a solution for a situation outside the norm.
 
2013-07-29 06:37:23 PM

drop: ciberido: Fourth, I do have to wonder why people are offended by this claim.  However inaccurate it may be

You're saying you're not offended by inaccurate claims?  That doesn't sound particularly healthy for an individual or a species that intends to survive.  I wonder just as much about people who aren't offended by inaccuracies, misrepresentations, or outright deception.  Any rational being should be offended by such things, no matter how mundane the subject matter.


Well, when I get my Daily Report done at work, and there's an inaccuracy, my boss gets all huffy.  But I just issue a correction.  It's inaccurate, and worthy of correction, but it doesn't offend me or even show up as a blip on my emotional radar.  There all kinds of different people.
 
2013-07-29 06:54:24 PM

drop: Five minutes "tops" is still 15 times longer than it takes me.  I can go from two shirts to four to six to a dozen and it still only takes 20 seconds.  How long does it take you?

I don't see the argument you're trying to make, and you're certainly not supporting the position that it takes "just as long" now to wash clothes as it used to in ye olde daies, because it's patently untrue -- for any number of clothing items, from one to fifty.


It may be accurate simply because now-a-days a person may wash a 7shirts, seven pants and 7 everything else, which then have to be put away afterward. And that assumes minimal folding/ no ironing, and other things that could quickly eat up time.
Before they may have only been washing 2 of each. Additionally we probably wash more things more often (sheets, towels, coats.)  We probably smell better too.

Likely the logic would be: The total time spent doing laundry is the same now as it was 50 years ago.
However now-a-days more clothing gets washed (since folks have more) and it gets washed after 1-2 uses.

That's not a lot different from work commutes over time, where the average has been something like half an hour for the last hundred years, people just moved further and further away from work.

As far as the quality argument goes, in my opinion we are giving something up for that convenience.
I've washed my clothes by hand, and even my unskilled hands were able to clean my clothes better than my machine does and accomplish it in a reasonable amount of time. Someone who knew what they were doing could know one out in a few seconds. One thing I did notice is that socks especially end up MUCH cleaner after hand washing.

I still use a machine at home though. They get "clean enough" and when my socks get too dirty, I'll just buy new ones.
 
2013-07-29 07:36:12 PM

Wangiss


But if you want your favorite shirt clean so you can wear it again quickly (say, to an event after a baby puked on it), you can hand-launder it in one to two minutes in the sink and then tumble-dry it with a dry towel. Then you get your shirt back in ten minutes instead of an hour, if that's all you need. There are times when you need a solution for a situation outside the norm.


The outside-the-norm solution here seems to be to have more than one such shirt.
 
2013-07-29 07:41:58 PM

mr0x: Guntram Shatterhand: Thoguh: Using the word "lifehack" should be a punchable offense.

Along with 'multitasking.'  Both are the same way of micromanaging time.

Actually, the original idea of multi-tasking was more like batching in computer science. It means you do something else only when the IO system kicks in (IO is thousands of times slower than CPU).

Basically means, you keep doing one thing until you reach a point where you need someone else's input or some interruption you can't control, you switch tasks.

So, the original idea behind multi-tasking was to switch to another task until your portion is done instead of twiddling your thumbs and fixating on a single task. Not, the modern equivalent of juggling ten tasks at the same time.


This. Human beings are really bad at "multitasking." As in, everything suffers when you try to do everything at once. But getting work done while you are waiting for a phone call or an email? That's actual multitasking, and it's very effective.
 
2013-07-29 07:42:54 PM

Englebert Slaptyback: Wangiss

But if you want your favorite shirt clean so you can wear it again quickly (say, to an event after a baby puked on it), you can hand-launder it in one to two minutes in the sink and then tumble-dry it with a dry towel. Then you get your shirt back in ten minutes instead of an hour, if that's all you need. There are times when you need a solution for a situation outside the norm.


The outside-the-norm solution here seems to be to have more than one such shirt.


OR, you can buy a stackable washer/dryer for your car/bike/train.
 
2013-07-29 07:45:03 PM

ArcadianRefugee: As "lifehacking" becomes an industry with its own blogs and book-length guides

Because "Hints from Heloise" never happened. No one has ever had "useful tips".

/another "quality" article from Slate


Pretty much this. Every kid thinks they invented the world, I guess. It's not like Women's Magazines and Reader's Digest haven't been doing just this since the dawn of time.
 
2013-07-29 07:46:44 PM

Dafatone: Every technological advance pitched as a way to save time, increase efficiency, and take a load off of workers, in the history of time, winds up making workers work harder for less.

Cotton gin, assembly line, computers, internet, etc.

If it lets you get more done in less time, you're expected to have more total output, not the same output in less time.  Always.  Since forever.


And that's why we don't live in mudthatched huts.
 
2013-07-29 08:04:13 PM
According to the article it's not lifehacking that ruins your life, it's addiction to lifehacking. Gee, people found another way to fix trivial problems to avoid dealing with real problems, news at 11.
 
2013-07-29 11:00:04 PM

ciberido: If it lets you get more done in less time, you're expected to have more total output, not the same output in less time.


More done in less time means just that; more done in less time. So long as you meet those two qualifications, nothing else matters.

Also:

ciberido: If it lets you get more done in less time


"Letting you" and "expecting of you" are two kinda different things. And by "kinda" I mean "completely".

ciberido: But here


The Daily Mail? Really?! "The average mother spends five months of her life doing laundry, says a study" they don't bother to cite. Also, five months is (5 months @ 30 days per month @ 24 hours per day) 3600 hours. Over the course of one's life.

ciberido: and here


And the Mirror? Those are your two sources?

are two websites that give you an idea of how much time we spend doing laundry today, if you really think it's worth arguing over, and here's something on laundry in the middle ages.

Well, according to your Mirror source, people spend 5.561 hours per week washing clothes. Comparing this to the Daily Mail's statement, we have (5.561 hours per week, 52.177 weeks in a year, 80 years) [we'll say an 80 year lifespan] over 23,212 hours! 23212 vs 3600.

Should check your sources better. And use better sources.

From your "medieval" source, we have
...it does not appear that medieval people washed their clothes as frequently as wash ours today.

a bit about owning very few clothes, and then
...the clothes must have become filthy and just stayed that way.

It then goes on to note that laundry services were available, and asks how such services could exist if people had so few clothes?
One possible anser is that people of the Middle Ages regularly washed or sent to the laundry only part of their clothes, the linen garments worn closest to the body...while cleaning the outer garments more infrequently.

So, they spent less time doing laundry because they just really didn't do much laundry.

And, if we were to compare, how much underwear do you think you could get shoved into a washing machine? I.e., how "fast" could you clean 50 undergarments?

(Also, asking you if you just sit and stare at your laundry, as Lister-esque as it is, is not an attack on you.)

Now, on the flipside:

"Ha-Joon Chang, a Cambridge economist ... argues that the washing machine was more revolutionary than the Internet. "In short, the washing machine has allowed women to get into the labor market so that we have nearly doubled the work force."" (Source)

Another source: Hans Rosling (medical doctor, academic, statistician, and Professor of International Health at Karolinska Institute)speaking at TEDwomen 2010, makes the case that the washing machine was the greatest invention of the industrial revolution (before going on about green energy and such) and how it gave his mother time to read to him, and her to learn English. (Video)

(And, you'll be happy to note, the guy's grandmother sat and "watched the entire washing program." :) )
Not an exact "number of hours per week" from either, but both make the case that it obviously allowed more free time.
 
2013-07-30 01:52:32 AM
Dare I say this has been among the dumbest arguments I've ever seen on fark? Impressive!
 
2013-07-30 01:55:06 AM
ITT: People getting all "someone is wrong on the internet" over laundry
 
2013-07-30 10:48:03 AM

Englebert Slaptyback: Wangiss

But if you want your favorite shirt clean so you can wear it again quickly (say, to an event after a baby puked on it), you can hand-launder it in one to two minutes in the sink and then tumble-dry it with a dry towel. Then you get your shirt back in ten minutes instead of an hour, if that's all you need. There are times when you need a solution for a situation outside the norm.


The outside-the-norm solution here seems to be to have more than one such shirt.


A good tuxedo shirt is $105.  I guess if you can afford one, you can afford two.  But some of us like to save money by knowing how to do things.
 
Displayed 86 of 86 comments

View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest


This thread is closed to new comments.

Continue Farking
Submit a Link »






Report