
How to Drop Out - gnosis
http://ranprieur.com/essays/dropout.html
======
moron4hire
He falls into a number of fundamental paradoxes in his reasoning.

He asserts that profit is evil, which is essentially saying that time spent
procuring resources is not a cost that can be recuperated through monetary
compensation. He almost even comes out and says time isn't a cost when he says
he'd think it evil to sell something he found while dumpster diving, "how can
you sell something you get for free?". He didn't get it for free, he got it
through the time effort of dumpster diving, a recurring cost that has a random
(though apparently positive) payoff. Yet his entire motivation for "dropping
out" is to use his time as he sees fit, because it is the most precious thing
to him.

He asserts that trade requires someone to be "the sucker", yet he justifies
his couch surfing by offering his friends services instead of money. Trade
fundamentally requires that both parties agree that the trade action is
advantageous to both of them; total value increases for both parties,
separately and combined.

He is absolutely engaged in a purely capitalistic system of free trade,
completely unfettered by the dead-weight loss of tax systems, and does nothing
but deride the one economic system that dragged the human race out of abject
poverty.

~~~
modeless
I think he's deluding himself. The way he lives off of thrown-out food,
secondhand clothes, and couch-surfing his friends and family means he's just
as dependent on the system he despises as any "wage slave". He's not living
free from the influence of money; he's just found ways to use other people's
money to his advantage.

I would love to see his reaction to a society that had collapsed in the way he
predicts. What would he do without "wage slaves" around to throw away food,
give away clothes, and let bums sleep in their houses?

~~~
burnsobright1
He has ten acres in Eastern Washington that he has an orchard on and is
planning on building a cabin on. If/when the society collapses, there won't be
any shortage of clothes, he could always just walk into a department store and
take some, because no one owns them anymore.

~~~
modeless
Subsistence farming is a totally different lifestyle than dumpster diving and
couch surfing, and I doubt he's much more prepared for it than your average
"wage slave".

Raiding deserted department stores is fine for a few years, but that's not a
long-term strategy. When the department store building collapses because
nobody's maintaining it, and when the clothes run out and the factories aren't
making any more, what then? Same with bicycles and any other technology he
likes to use.

~~~
tiedyedsoul
You should really read his other stuff before You comment; He has specifically
addressed most of these issues.

------
xsmasher
I remember staring at the computer screen--light green letters on dark--then
at the clock, and finally at my outstretched fingers held a foot in front of
my face. And then it dawned on me: selling the hours of my life was no
different from selling my fingers one by one. We've only so many hours, so
many fingers; when they're gone, they're gone for good. - Derrick Jensen

------
notauser
I rather liked this bit:

"If you require a motivational writer or speaker to live differently, then as
soon as that external energy shot wears off, you will fizzle and burn out. But
if everyone is trying to discourage you from doing something, and you do it
anyway, then you have the internal motivation to persist and succeed."

This probably applies to start ups too. Starting up on my own has been 1%
partying at cool start up events and 99% quietly getting on with stuff that
needs to be done. This is not exactly how it is sold to people - one great
idea, 15 minutes of hacking to a suitably cool soundtrack, then off to the
nightclub to flagrantly spend the IPO money. Possibly you might have to suffer
a back alley chase or two with agents dispatched from the Yamicroogle offices
to steal your technology, but that's about the extent of the sacrifice.

The 1% is fun! But if you aren't the kind of person who also enjoys the other
99% I don't know how you would cope.

~~~
zackattack
Can you break down how you spend the other 99% please? Into percentage
brackets, please? Thank you so much, it would be very insightful.

~~~
notauser
<http://theplanis.com/blog/preview/10/> might be of interest.

The technical work is about 50% working on new features and 50% tracking down
customer issues.

The non-technical stuff is a mix of blogging, twitter, going to events, public
speaking, e-mailing prospects, calling people, customer support and enterprise
sales ground work. The percentages vary wildly depending on what is going on
at the time.

------
zmoney
I think this is super-interesting, not because I have any real desire to couch
surf (or squat in an abandoned building), but because it gives more
perspective on the scope of what's possible. Personally, I'm working
60hrs/week at a job that pays very well but the commute and hours suck up all
of my energy and is filled with people that suck even more. I don't see myself
becoming a dumpster-diver, but what I really want is employment that occupies
a limited space in my life -- and still pays the bills. So this piece is
inspiring in that it shows that you can create the life you want, if you're
willing to do things differently and take risks.

------
Mz
I find stuff like this interesting to read but also a bit sad. Rebelling by
doing the "opposite" of something is a poor substitute for real choice because
you are still defined by the thing you reject. Generally speaking, I prefer
pursuing "the third option"
(<http://tvtropes.org/pmwiki/pmwiki.php/Main/TakeAThirdOption>).

I do currently live without a car and I'm happier this way. But, having spent
many years as a homemaker, I don't think there is some inherent virtue in not
having money of one's own or an income. I did get to live for many years in a
way that taught me inherent value over "price". Lots of people these days seem
to equate placing a dollar amount on something with real value, but it's not
the same thing. Perhaps that is a mental model this individual was struggling
with when the original essay was written. He does indicate he has since bought
land. Presumably his thinking has evolved over time and he might not say the
same things now that he said when this was written. Maybe he has found his own
third option now, one where his idea of "freedom" involves more real choice
rather than reactionary rejection of money.

------
techwriter1
Having read Ran for many years, I can tell you that he is definitely "giving
back" by sharing with his readers and the world his thoughts and himself in a
most honest and kind way while living according to his principles.

Yes his ideas are provocative, and I wish more of us were able to critique our
own thinking, our own group-think, and our own society as he does. He reminds
us constantly how our willingness and need to identify--our allegances--become
an easy way for us to stop thinking for ourselves. It takes real work to
maintain a remove from the propoganda around us, to be able to see it for what
it is, and act against it by helping others to open their minds a little (or a
lot).

A couple of you have noticed his "Land Blog." See how he uses his land project
as a laboratory for his own thinking, and to test the concepts that so many
people are only talking about yet seem to have such strong opinions on while
never having actually DONE anything like that.

It might also interest some of you to know that he used to accept donations,
but lately due to having come into a small amount of money, discourages them.
Though he has manners and will accept a gift graciously.

It is clear that so many of the commenters here work quite dilligently to
defend their own closely held beliefs and ways of living, while trying to find
faults with alternative ideas that are not THAT far removed from your own.
What is the threat you perceive? That maybe some of the life choices you have
made and the belief systems you have invested in may have been a wrong turn, a
dead-end, or at least not the ones that create joy and happiness? Rigidity of
thinking is widespread, and some of the most rigid minds I've encountered are
those that consider themselves far-left new-agers! (though I don't mean to
suggest that describes the posters here).

------
rikthevik
...For very young people there are also two universes. Squatting over a tub of
warm water is a much cheaper and healthier way to give birth than lying on
your back in a harsh hospital room where the high priest will take the infant
away from the mother to teach it alienation...

Arghhh. Having children is _not easy_. There's a reason we still say "Mom and
baby are healthy and happy." For a long time we lost one or both pretty
regularly. I don't agree with all aspects of western society, but clean
hospitals and infant intensive care units are most of the reason infant
mortality has dropped.

~~~
cpr
Childbirth is not _easy_, but it's certainly a normal part of life, and
treating it like a sickness, requiring hospitalization, is perverse.

We had the last 4 of our 8 at home, with, yes, one close call, but with a
competent midwife, that's par for the course.

~~~
philwelch
Childbirth isn't done in hospitals because it's a sickness, it's done in
hospitals in case an emergency happens. I couldn't have been born at home--my
mother would have to have been whisked away to a hospital for a c-section
anyway. The fact that she was already in the hospital and attended to by an
obstetrician made that process considerably safer and more reliable.

------
hegemonicon
I didn't read the whole thing, so correct this if it's wrong but...

He hasn't dropped out at all - he's just found a way to live within the system
such that he can take from it without giving back. He benefits enormously from
the very system he denigrates. If anything that's a statement of how amazing
our society is, that it's successful enough that people can live largely off
its freebies and its waste products.

I'm sure for some peope society is awful and living away from it really is the
very best option. But society wasn't foisted on us without our consent. At one
point we were ALL living off the land - and we didn't like it. So we built
civilization.

~~~
pradocchia
_But society wasn't foisted on us without our consent._

I don't recall having any say in it. Where's the opt-out clause?

At one point it might have been America (if you were European). Supposedly,
the colonists had a lot of trouble with their indentured servants going
native, thus the early colonial emphasis on freedom and natural rights as a
mitigating measure.

Later, it might have been the West.

But today? How do you opt out now? Where's the release valve?

~~~
jey
There's plenty of uninhabited land. I also don't see how the Europeans who
fled to America were escaping society... they formed "normal" civilizations
after coming over to the 'New World'.

~~~
burnsobright1
The uninhabited land is all called for, residing in a country/under a
government with its laws, etc.

------
gsteph22
This is actually quite salient advice. There's so many blogs that just say,
"OMG do it!". You need to be rational and have a plan.

------
nzmsv
His advice makes sense, but only if you believe what he believes, namely that
it's ok to mooch off others, and call that "dropping out".

Now, the article explicitly bashes self-sufficiency, so I guess it's just a
matter of which viewpoint you subscribe to.

~~~
stcredzero
So long as you can fit into the economic order without stealing or vandalizing
or otherwise being a nuisance, you are not a "mooch" in my book.

I think that any viable theory of "dropping out" will take market forces into
account. I find that this article does some of that, though it seems to me
that it doesn't go far enough. (In particular, he notes that trying to do what
you love resulting in doing what you no longer love. Market forces can explain
this one quite handily!)

~~~
nzmsv
I'd argue that saying "I'm free" and then continuing with "I've been doing
lots of house-sitting" and "find a partner who will support you" isn't exactly
something to be proud of.

~~~
stcredzero
I had a friend who did a lot of house sitting before moving to Atlanta to make
her living off of Bellydance instruction/performance. (And in contradiction to
the article, she is doing her dream job, without compromise to her art. In
fact, stylistic purity is one of the hallmarks of her "brand.")

Also, "find a partner who will support you," is exactly what my mom did. Being
a homemaker and mother _is_ a legitimate full time job, one which our society
should highly prize. Anyone who says otherwise is inattentive or hasn't really
thought things through.

~~~
randallsquared
_Being a homemaker and mother is a legitimate full time job_

...and therefore not "dropping out", right?

~~~
stcredzero
It's not "working for the man" in the way it's usually meant. (In particular
"man" means something different in that context!)

------
lsc
personally, I disagree with point 5. I think is is possible to separate the
bullshit surrounding work for your love of creating the things you create. I
spent five years pouring all the money I got from being a SysAdmin into my
hosting business. The business is ramen profitable now, and growing quickly.

Key, I think, is to separate yourself from the company you work for. think of
it as being a contractor. "I'm giving you the best advice I can. If you don't
take it, well, I've still done my job" and "I will work for you as long as the
money is worth my time. I understand that the opposite also applies, and I
don't take it personally if an employer feels they can do better."

(then, you also need to deal with personal failure, but that is true even
after you become independent. Though, personally, I find it is easier to say
"oh, you didn't like my services? here's a full refund" now that I'm a product
company and the things I'm selling are not as limited as my hours. Not giving
people refunds when I personally fucked up was one of the things I liked least
about selling my hours. But it is just very difficult to do so.)

------
RyanMcGreal
> Get the most low-stress source of income that you can find, and then do
> exactly what you love for free.

That's what I do.

~~~
Tichy
The thought occurred to me at times, but I must admit, I would also feel a bit
bad about it. It was OK when I was a student, and I wish I had taken on more
cool jobs (if only to work as a waiter and get to know people). But know I
feel bad for the people who don't have the education I have. I have the
possibility to get a high paying IT job - they don't, and rely on the "normal"
jobs. I don't want to take it away from them.

Though I admit I am undecided, sometimes I feel like whatever, just do what I
need.

~~~
eru
You can't take away jobs (in the big picture and long run).

~~~
Tichy
Why not? Unless you assume an infinite supply of skilled IT workers - and
granted why not. But if there is a shortage of IT workers, but not of waiters,
and I choose to work as a waiter instead of in IT, another waiter is out of
luck?

~~~
eru
See <http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lump_of_labour_fallacy>

------
joss82
From the article's "criticism and response" page :

Q:What you're suggesting is parasitism.

A:Industrial civilization is parasitic, because it takes more from its
environment than it gives back, and if we remove ourselves from roles that
feed that behavior, we are anti-parasites.

That does not make sense. If he is parasiting a parasite, he is still a
parasite. He's not causing sufficient harm to destroy society, but still he
profits from it, by diving into dumpsters.

~~~
normative
Parasitism causes a reduction in fitness to the host, if anything most of
these strategies would be better defined as commensal, i.e. beneficial to the
fitness of the symbiont but having no positive or negative effect on the host.

------
sown
One one hand it is still part of the system he dislikes. He takes what he can
and doesn't "give" anything back. Some might call him a moocher. The idea of
profit as inherently evil seems like saying atomic power is also such.

On the other, I can understand that one shouldn't feel grateful towards a
system that feels unfair or is somehow harmful. I'm at work today and as I
watch this cluster flux-up in progress I sometimes wonder what am I doing with
myself? Are all jobs like this? Do they at least start out not like this? It's
an insult to me and my co workers (we need to write less bugs, people) and
even some of my managers but this is the way the project is put together by
outside forces. It'll probably fail anyways but has a higher chance of doing
so if we rush rush rush. And I'll get laid off anyways, no matter how much or
little I work at it.

~~~
ido
Get another job if you can.

------
fuzzmeister
"Here's a test: when Thoreau was living at Walden Pond, he would often go into
town for dinners with his family."

As an aside, its amusing how many people come to Concord and are stunned to
learn that Walden Pond is only a little over a mile from the center of town -
not exactly the middle of nowhere.

~~~
LogicHoleFlaw
I think anywhere can be the middle of nowhere, if you put your mind to it.

------
enjo
_shrugs_

Call me old-fashioned, but I see work as the ultimate form of decency.

~~~
stingraycharles
_Call me old-fashioned, but I see work as the ultimate form of decency._

Why ?

~~~
aaronblohowiak
<http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Protestant_work_ethic>

~~~
dschobel
That does explain a lot. I had a coworker at my last job who was appalled that
I could quit and not have other work lined up (I just went and bummed around
Zurich for the summer).

This guy was in his late 30's, single, had a low-level IT job and plainly said
that the only reason he gets out of bed in the morning is to come to work (a
job which he bitched about endlessly).

I could never understand the psychology of it.

------
cma
How Not to Drop Out: <http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=917395>

~~~
peterwwillis
I did something like this. Living as a homeless person is probably the biggest
perception change you can have without drugs.

------
chrislloyd
I'd prefer the term "simplist" rather than "dropout". I think it further
emphasises that it's a gradual, not a radical, change of dependance on the
world.

------
azanar
I honestly an unable to take this author very seriously, in spite of a few
insightful nuggets he has within his article.

The minimalistic approach he takes is one I follow to a degree myself, but for
radically different reasons than he does. I've found that having extraneous
things don't make me any happier. Actively rejecting them as part of a radical
lifestyle doesn't make me happier either. I am happy because I don't notice
them missing, because I don't need them and don't have anyone around reminding
me that I should or shouldn't.

The reason I define his lifestyle as radical is because of this.

"I hate civilization as much as anyone, but in these last few years before it
crashes, we should appreciate and use what it offers."

Civilization is _not_ going to fail any more than every time prior where it
was purportedly on the brink. If you are using this as an excuse for anything,
please stop now. You are actively contributing to problems that, if
civilization could fail, might cause it to do so. As romantic of a notion as
this might be, it will suck beyond belief if it actually happens.

The other notion, that somehow our economy must either be Utopian or
negatively-amortizing itself into oblivion, is stated as truth with nothing
more than sneering toward idiots, elites, and robber barons as the
perpetrators. I normally try to be more cool-headed than this, but this claim
is _bullshit_. There _are_ other options, and given incentives and
perspective, people _will_ pursue them. And the incentives are there, for them
and everyone else, if people would knock off all of these various scorched
earth policies.

The perspective this author offers will keep them from pursuing those options,
if people listen to him. I want to liken him to a reader of tea leaves, who's
motives may not be less than wholesome; is the tasseographer offering a vision
into your future, or are they merely attempting to influence your frame of
mind for their own benefit?

It is that frame of mind which determines whether or not you think doing hard
work that you love for money is possible or desirable. I think it is possible;
I've seen people do it. The author would like me to believe these people are
living a lie, and are probably depressed and putting on an fake image for me.
I wonder if he believes any of the depressed people are faking it?

As to whether it is desirable, this depends on one's frame of mind. Do you
believe that a difficult problem you solve today will matter tomorrow? Do you
believe that, if someone pays you to solve that difficult problem, it will
matter less than one you solved for free? Do you believe that your work will
benefit both yourself and society in some tangible and sustainable way? Do you
believe that some impending catastrophe will render all of your work
irrelevant? How much of this is passive believe, and how much of what you
believe dictates your actions and the influence you have over the eventual
outcome?

This really comes down to frame of mind, which seem more and more like matters
of faith. You might think civilization sucks; you might think money sucks; you
might think doing anything but the bare minimum amount of work to survive
another day sucks. I would disagree with all of these claims, but how would I
have a reasonable discussion about this? How do you change someone's frame of
mind when the validation they've been seeking for years might finally come to
pass tomorrow? In a way, I think the first step is realizing that our frames
of mind are not without consequence.

------
talkingtiki
Ugh, this nonsense again?

~~~
davi
Better criticism (or link thereto) please.

~~~
tjpick
ugh, this stick-it-to-the-man, non-conformist, I'm-special, anti-progress,
touchy-feely, the-whole-world-is-wrong nonsense again?

~~~
davi
Upmodded despite disagreeing with you. At least now we get some idea about
what your problem with the article is.

~~~
JeremyStein
Are you assuming that talkingtiki agrees with tjpick?

~~~
davi
Whoops, you're right, I missed the username change while monitoring via the
'threads' link.

~~~
Tichy
To be fair, their usernames look vaguely similar :-)

------
tptacek
_A "dirty" environment strengthens the immune system, and if I were a toddler
again, I'd much rather live in a cool abandoned house or junkyard or shack in
the woods than in a sterile room with a television where I wasn't allowed to
touch anything._

Douche.

~~~
stcredzero
_I'd much rather live in a cool abandoned house or junkyard or shack in the
woods than in a sterile room with a television where I wasn't allowed to touch
anything._

Shack in the woods: I've heard that Amish children are quite happy. Not sure
about older adolescents.

Growing up in a sterile suburban setting has serious downsides. My sister and
I both grew feeling not "real" somehow. Thank goodness we both somehow escaped
the flypaper of 80's Rap!

~~~
tptacek
I've got no problem with the Amish. I have a huge problem with someone who
deliberately raises children as crypto-homeless "dropouts".

~~~
dunstad
Which is all well and good, except that the author doesn't. He explicitly
states that he wouldn't try to raise a kid while in a dropout/simplist
lifestyle.

