Hacker News new | past | comments | ask | show | jobs | submit login

All of that sounds reasonable, except "Live in a multi-unit building in a city". Being that close to that many people sounds like hell.



Well, you certainly don't _have_ to. If you desire access to friends, goods, and services without using carbon-intense forms of transport it tends to make things easier. It also means you're not converting wild land to lawns, asphalt, parking, et cetera. Finally, one of the best ways to improve delivery efficiency is to decrease the last-mile distance (probably poorly named) from a distribution point, like a grocery store, to the site of consumption.

Living in a small residence in wild land without the need for automobile-scale infrastructure to support it would address most of the issues I raised above (a small cottage accessible primarily via mountain bike perhaps? I think I'm selling myself on this idea...)

Then again subsistence farming in a manner that doesn't remove wild vegetation, or better yet uses it without drawing too much from the population, is probably even better. It could be a lonely life though.

Or just live in the country and ride your bike to the city a lot.


Yes, if only there weren't so many darn people on this planet, but of course you're entitled to your space. /s


What about it sounds like hell, exactly? We're all different, but I think some of us underestimate our adaptability.




Guidelines | FAQ | Support | API | Security | Lists | Bookmarklet | Legal | Apply to YC | Contact

Search: