What's the appeal of collecting high priced watches? Is it kind of like art collections, where its a decent store of value while maintaining a collection of something you are personally interested in? Or is it more for "love of the game"?
Not saying its not a cool thing to collect, well made watches are a very cool piece of engineering, I'm just curious if there's any "special" appeal outside of "i like this thing and have the money to enjoy it" :)
> What's the appeal of collecting high priced watches?
You can carry them on your person through airports and other places reasonably unmolested in a way carrying a bunch of cash isn't so easy.
> Is it kind of like art collections, where its a decent store of value
Art doesn't store value: It trades whatever number the parties exchanging it want it to have, so those parties can manipulate their total annual revenues, which might be confused with value if you cannot think of why else someone would want to tell other people they made more or less money in a year, but is not valuable to anyone else.
> It trades whatever number the parties exchanging it want it to have
I'd argue that that's the very definition of (economic) value. Someone puts a cost on a good/service, and someone who values and can satisfy the cost gets said good/service.
Sure it is, but that's not a way to store value (what economists specifically call store of value if you want to read more about it), which is a little different:
If you buy a €100k rolex, you probably can't be sure you can sell it for more than €100k anywhere at anytime in the future.
You probably can't even find a bank that would take that €100k rolex you just bought as collateral for €500k on a 30y mortgage.
That's why a €1m watch collection is never going to be worth €1m unless we're talking raw materials.
> > What's the appeal of collecting high priced watches?
> You can carry them on your person through airports and other places reasonably unmolested in a way carrying a bunch of cash isn't so easy.
Now I have to ask, why do you need to carry a bunch of cash through airports, and why so often that you need a method of doing so?
I'm of course assuming you're doing this for legal reasons, I understand all the reasoning for less legal ones, but then that's hardly comparable to the original question, so I think this is a fair assumption.
Sure, some people use them to signal status but I'd say the vast majority of the collector community does not buy expensive watches for that reason.
At the $100k range you get a lot of things that appeal to a watch enthusiast: true high-horology hand finishing (like handmade anglage and sharp interior angles), some of the more advanced complications, more interesting escapements, etc.
More this. I love wearing what are basically highly complex, mechanical works of art on my wrist. It appeals to both the engineer/nerd and the romantic inside me.
Some watches hold value, others don't. I have some watches that have halved, others that have doubled. But I don't really intend to sell so it's immaterial.
With the rise of agentic coding, this has become a sign of quality for me in my own PRs and reviews: New features implemented in less than a thousand lines of productive code.
When I'm working on code that was heavily vibecoded, most of my PRs are reducing LoC by a couple hundreds of lines while fixing bugs or implementing a new feature.
My job kind of feels like being a garbage man, luckily my current employer appreciates it. Personally I think the current style of vibecoding only kinda works, because models are getting better fast enough to keep the shitpile from overflowing completely. Betting on the harnesses + models getting good enough to clean up after themselves is a bet, and I don't like gambling, but even I admit the odds don't seem to be bad.
"""
Steve Ballmer
In IBM there's a religion in software that says you have to count K-LOCs, and a K-LOC is a thousand line of code. How big a project is it? Oh, it's sort of a 10K-LOC project. This is a 20K-LOCer. And this is 5OK-LOCs. And IBM wanted to sort of make it the religion about how we got paid. How much money we made off OS 2, how much they did. How many K-LOCs did you do? And we kept trying to convince them - hey, if we have - a developer's got a good idea and he can get something done in 4K-LOCs instead of 20K-LOCs, should we make less money? Because he's made something smaller and faster, less KLOC. K-LOCs, K-LOCs, that's the methodology. Ugh anyway, that always makes my back just crinkle up at the thought of the whole thing.
"""
So many times in my career I have seen a problem that could be handled with two lines of code and a table lookup being handled with 40 lines of code and a switch statement. So the guy writing the 40 lines of codes switch statement would get paid 20 times more money!
I had to learn Prolog for a university paper and I have to agree; out of the dozen-ish languages I've had to learn, something just didn't "click" with Prolog.
No real value is this comment, I'm just happy to share a moment over the brain-fuck that is Prolog (ironically Brainfuck made a whole lot more sense).
I tell people to treat LLM's like a toddler (albeit a very capable toddler).
Do kids learn well when you only tell them what NOT to do? Of course not! You should be explaining how to do things correctly, and most importantly the WHY, as well as providing examples of both the "correct" and "incorrect" ways (also explaining why an example is incorrect).
The best way to describe AI agents I've heard: treat them as hostages that will do anything to appease their captor.
They have a vast latent knowledge base, infinite patience and zero capacity for making personal judgement calls. You give one a goal and it will try to meet that goal.
> The best way to describe AI agents I've heard: treat them as hostages that will do anything to appease their captor.
A scary image, if we consider agents to develop anything like a conscience at some point in time. Of course, with the current approach they never might, but are we so sure?
Why? There are actually valuable takeaways from this.
One would be that people are the weak point in your security system. If all your organizational security hinges on one guy not folding, that guy is the natural target. Whether a literal 5$ wrench is used or they bribe him makes no difference.
That means you could consider shaping your org in a way that is resistent against this by e.g. decentralizing secrets. That means instead of bringing a "5$ wrench" to one person (which may even work without raising suspicion), you now need to convince multiple people at once which is much more unlikely to work without being detected.
In a similar way sometimes the best way to protect data is not to collect it of if you collect it not keep it around in its raw form.
As for secrets, you sometimes need to have them for very good reasons. If you can reach the same goals without a secret while having the same protection going without a secret is a good choice.
But let's assume if you want the cryptographic protections of confidentiality (through encryption), authenticity (through signatures) and integrity (also through signatures or hashes) chances are someone somewhere has to store a secret. If that someone isn't you it is someone else (or something else).
But if you want to protect data with encryption and you should be the only one who can decrypt it I don't really know how you would do it without any form of secret.
Why? Everyone knows about rubber-hose cryptanalysis. The whole point of cryptography is to reduce them to this.
If they want our information, they should have to become literal tyrants, send armed men after us and violate human rights in order to get it. Not push a button on a computer to tap into their warrantless global dragnet surveilance networks and suddenly have our entire private lives revealed to them on a computer screen.
Yes, people will fold if they are kidnapped and tortured. That's not news. Forcing them to stoop to that is the entire design. Once the situation has escalated to that level, you are justified in killing them in self-defense. Torturers don't make a habit of allowing their victims to live and testify about it.
It's really pretty stupid. Your encryption is there in case your laptop gets stolen. If you have people willing and able to kidnap and torture you to get your data, you have much bigger problems than the fact that they'll probably get it.
If you do a site search you'll find 700+ comments linking to it. I wouldn't be surprised if it was the number one most frequently linked page in HN history.
Video description, from the Velcro brand YouTube channel:
Our Velcro Brand Companies legal team decided to clear a few things up about using the VELCRO® trademark correctly – because they’re lawyers and that’s what they do. When you use “velcro” as a noun or a verb (e.g., velcro shoes), you diminish the importance of our brand and our lawyers lose their insert fastening sound. So please, do not say “velcro shoes” (or “velcro wallet” or “velcro gloves”) - we repeat “velcro” is not a noun or a verb. VELCRO® is our brand. #dontsayvelcro
Not saying its not a cool thing to collect, well made watches are a very cool piece of engineering, I'm just curious if there's any "special" appeal outside of "i like this thing and have the money to enjoy it" :)