Ask HN: Do you also marvel at the complexity of everyday objects?

479 points by parpfish ↗ HN
A few weeks ago I was doing some soldering and I started using a spool of insulated 22-gauge wire.

Maybe it was the solder fumes, but I started thinking about what it actually took to create that spool of wire -- everything from the geologists and miners extracting ore, through all the metallurgy, industrial engineering, and plastics work. And I started to marvel at all the work and expertise it took to make something that I normally would've just considered a semi-disposable consumable item. It made me wonder whether that spool of wire was actually a piece of technology on par in sophistication with all the software that I build every day.

It was such an odd moment, but it's has caused a lasting perspective shift. almost every day I'll look at some commonplace object I took for granted and think "this is actually so complex, no single human has all the knowledge or expertise to create it".

I'm curious if anybody else has had a similar experience and/or what are some simple everyday objects that give you pause when you stop to think about their complexity

328 comments

[ 3.0 ms ] story [ 536 ms ] thread
I was thinking about it one time, coincidentally I went into the example of metal wire itself. I call it the "Stack trace of an object"

https://chat.openai.com/share/3bad8272-c632-4659-8c0b-59578e...

There is also, based on this definition of the stack trace, what are the most simplest objects. the simpleness of an object is defined by the height of that stack trace

so maybe it WAS triggered by solder fumes!
You may enjoy the book How To Invent Everything[1], which scratches the surface of recreating everyday inventions/conveniences in a satisfying way.

1. https://www.howtoinventeverything.com

Interesting. I just yesterday talked about this book with a friend during coffee. If you read this, good morning Sveniboi.
How to invent everything was a bit too hand wavy for me. It would barely scratch the surface of a topic (like making steel) and declare "and now you've invented steel" so that it could move on to help you invent other things now that you have steel ignoring the time and labor and trial and error required to reliably produce steel (which could be years).

If you like that thought experiment though (reinventing society from scratch) I recommend the anime Dr. Stone and the YouTube channel Primitive Technology.

My attention has lately turned to the possibilities offered by ‘new’ materials, especially ceramics. I have a hunch that 40% of everything the industry produces with metals could be built with oxides and rare earths [not so rare, actually]. New materials force redefinitions in shapes and textures. A completely new world of shapes and textures will appear in the coming years/decades.

The deterioration of the online environment in recent years has made me turn my eyes to the world of tangible things. Reality has a reassuring character. In the last few years I have become a maker of real things[0] and I have been happy that way. I am also enchanted by the beauty of certain forms created by human industry.

(!)This links to my blog, so I’m breaking the url so as not to be accused of spamming the board.

[0]h\ps://voxleone.com/2024/03/05/3d-printing-im-making-a-500c-ceramic-hot-end/

I share your sense of wonder at everyday objects. The essay “I,Pencil” captures this rather poignantly.

https://cdn.mises.org/I%20Pencil.pdf

Whenever I think of "I, Pencil", for some reason, I think of John Wick.
"It wasn’t until 1841 that Joseph Whitworth managed to find a solution. After years of research collecting sample screws from many British workshops, he suggested standardizing the size of the screw threads in Britain so that, for example, someone could make a bolt in England and someone in Glasgow could make the nut and they would both fit together. His proposal was that the angle of the thread flanks was standardized at 55 degrees, and the number of threads per inch, should be defined for various diameters. While this issue was being addressed in Britain, the Americans were trying to do likewise and initially started using the Whitworth thread. "

It hasn't even been 200 years since invention & usage of standardized parts. We've come a long way.

https://www.nord-lock.com/insights/knowledge/2017/the-histor...

Small parts like bolts are standardized, but things like car parts that easily could be aren't. Car manufacturers fight tooth and nail to block third party suppliers of spares for their cars. It will always be like this because most car manufacturers make very little profit from cars themselves. All the money is in credit fees and aftermarket care and servicing. If you can control the market for that you make a lot more profit.

This is true for cars, electricals, furniture ... everything really. It's only the very simple base elements that are standardized.

Standardization and modularity are really the keys to making things that last and reducing our material impact, as opposed to the semi-disposable manufacturing we do now.

But the current financial/capitalist system does not incentize modularity, or creating open standards.

Modularity != standardization. You can have modular components but that are not standard and standard components that are not modular.
Another option is the biodegradable route, as chosen by so many human civilizations we don't see much evidence of.

It was here on HN where I learned about a city in now-Cambodia (I think) revealed by ground-penetrating radar. I found it fascinating, and I love the idea that awhole city could leave so little evidence.

The industry definitely is going in this direction.

You can find cars from different brands with the same light covers.

A lot of manufacturers use the same base system for their daughter companies.

Ah, but are those going to be different brands across companies? After all, most auto manufacturers have multiple brands (traditionally, the big three automakers had a low-end, middle-tier and high-end brand, e.g., Ford’s Mercury-Ford-Lincoln trinity, although in the last thirty years a number of brands were shuttered. Add in international consolidation (Chrysler was owned for a while by Daimler-Benz and now by Fiat, Ford used to have an ownership stakes in Jaguar, Volvo and Mazda among others) and you might be seeing intra-corporate part sharing, not inter-corporate.
It does happen that smaller car makers will use parts from other makers in their cars because it is too expensive to design and produce all of the parts themselves. Switches, tail lights, etc are often done this way.

It is not uncommon for parts that are made by third parties will be used in cars by different makers. Aisin makes transmissions used in many brands. This can backfire when the third party maker has a production problem which affects a wide range of cars in multiple makers. The Takata air bags were used in many brands of cars until they were found to blast shrapnel into the faces of occupants. Takata has been struggling for years to produce enough replacement parts to fulfill all of the recalls.

In the USA, bolts can come in plenty of sizes, but 2-56, 4-40, and 6-32 are common small bolts.

You want metric? You would think 2mm, 3mm, 4mm would be enough, but no! There are 2.5 mm, 3.5 mm, 4.5 mm etc. Are these 'necessary' even if they can be produced as 'standard'?

It's the old saw about Standards -- there are so many to choose from.

> Car manufacturers fight tooth and nail to block third party suppliers of spares for their cars.

Source?

A cursory glance [0] at a few 2020 model year cars from many brands (Volkswagen Golf, Genesis G70, Ford Mustang, Toyota Corolla, Honda CR-V) show a multiple of aftermarket parts for most common items (ignition components, brake components, steering and suspension components). I’ve owned a dozen cars that I’ve repaired almost 100% by myself, and it’s very rare to be unable to find aftermarket parts; usually only in cases where the car is sufficiently old and uncommon that the manufacturer is the only one interested in making parts anymore (as was the case with my RX-7).

Some brand-new (2023+) cars may not have aftermarket parts available, but this is almost always because they’re too new for the aftermarket to have made any yet.

About the only parts that are hard to find third-party are those that are too low-volume to be profitable: modern headlight and taillight assemblies, which usually last for thousands of hours and may only need replacing in a collision; body panels that generally only need replacing in a collision; specialized controllers such as for adaptive suspension or pseudo-limited-slip-differential-through-braking. ECUs are commonly brought up as an example (“the manufacturers don’t want people modifying the cars they own!!”) but this really boils down to both the manufacturer and aftermarket companies not wanting to be held responsible by the EPA/other environmental agencies, as well as the fact that ECUs very rarely fail relative to, for instance, brake rotors or fuel pumps.

[0] https://rockauto.com

I have this book purchased but as of yet unread, which I believe covers similar topics

The Perfectionists: How Precision Engineers Created the Modern World https://www.goodreads.com/en/book/show/35068671 (in my market it's actually titled "Exactly", with the same subtitle)

I often think about how the simple machine of the screw is such a profound and impactful invention. From furniture in our home to the home itself to spacecraft we have sent into the cosmos, the screw has been quietly holding our world together for millenia.
It was invented in 400 BCE by Archytas of Tarentum, a Greek philosopher (the father of mechanics).
> "The hip of Trigonopterus oblongus .."

Screws are also found in nature, like this weevil uses a screw 100 million years ago, to move a joint allowing it to cling onto plants more robustly.

- https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Trigonopterus

Nature has always been a great source of inspiration for invention.

For instance, "If we had the sun at night then it wouldn't be so hard to see things!" (Fire, Lightbulbs, LEDs...)

And today we have US and UK regular garden hose threads: same TPI, same diameter, slightly different thread pitch. You can turn the former about 1.5 turns onto the latter before it jams up.

Standards!

Are you telling me I packed all this hose for my trip to London for no reason at all? Can I pick up an adapter at the airport?
(comment deleted)
The UK was such a pioneer in those times! Quite sad how backward-looking the country has become.
A huge part of it is that when you're working with wood, standardization isn't terribly important.

Nails can vary in size, hammer them in. Even screwing into wood really doesn't care terribly much as long as the drill and the screw are roughly the same width.

But machine work, those need to be precise.

While interchangeable, standardized parts are significant, they are unnecessary if we make and repair our own stuff out of materials sourced from the land and water, and said stuff includes: canoes, paddles, baskets, bedding, shelter (even large houses for several families), hand tools (including weapons), and clothing, off the top. These "old ways" will keep us going on Earth awhile yet, and not just scudding along the bottom, but thriving, together.
99pi is a podcast about things like this: https://99percentinvisible.org/about/the-show/

But it's a great way to view the world. The next time you see an object, ask yourself how it all comes together. The table your laptop is sitting on? Think about the screws, the joinery, the glue. Think about the screw itself, the washer, the nut. The precision tooling for the screw's teeth. Think about the glue and the packaging it came in and how it was applied. Think about the machines that cut the wood, the assembly, the material used to polish it. The complexity in packaging it, storing it, picking it, transporting it, shipping it, all of it. And in each one of those transitions, consider the complexity of the cars, ships, shipping containers, cranes -- how much went into all of it. It's a beautifully complex world.

And then all of the digital physically-insubstantial parts of it too. All the computer code and files, all of the financial side of things. money is mostly digital these days. Insurance is a whole conceptual thing too. The way it all has to happen and work together to make it all happen is simply magnificent!
Ah! This gets compounded when you have kid(s), especially from about 3-4 years to about 10-11 years. “Papa, I will show you something,” my daughter said a few years back. “See, the light in the fridge turns off when I press this button. Do you know the light is off when you shut the fridge, and this button does that trick? I had to look up YouTube videos to know how that works.”

We take a lot of things for granted, but slowing down the speed of our daily routine/duties and looking a tad closer gives us a different perspective.

Some of my most profound joys have been small moments like that with my, now, 5-year-old. Many of them about the physical world or technology, but also just discovering all the best little things about being alive - like pie.
You probably should crack open a window or two :D

An idea that stuck with me was that everything around you that isn't natural was made by somebody. Buildings, roads, sewer grates, televisions, whiteboard markers, candy wrappers, all of them were made - directly or indirectly - by humans. That's a lot of things!

You could ponder the convoluted logistics and manufacturing of a Hakko FA-400 fume absorbing fan while you are soldering next time. Might not be the same trip but at least you won't get the headache that caused this post.
If you wish to make an apple pie from scratch, you must first invent the universe. —Carl Sagan

We stand on the shoulders of giants, working for thousands of years. And it’s quite interesting what the ancient world had already figured out.

Marcus du Sautoy has a series about the history of math. They were studying it and had taxes already in ancient Sumeria.

James Burke’s Connections is a great series on the haphazard progression of technology. And Cosmos is great as well.

I immediately searched for this quote when I read the OP. Thanks!
You might be interested in the article: Reality has a surprising amount of detail[1].

> It’s tempting to think ‘So what?’ and dismiss these details as incidental or specific to stair carpentry. And they are specific to stair carpentry; that’s what makes them details. But the existence of a surprising number of meaningful details is not specific to stairs. Surprising detail is a near universal property of getting up close and personal with reality.

Yes, it's a marvel how the world functions at all. I speculate even a simple toothbrush is a result of coordination between dozens of supply chains. Even a safety pin is a marvel of engineering. Of course, it can easily be explained by humans' ability to specialize and coordinate in really large numbers. Yet, it doesn't take away the fact that how far we have come.

[1]: http://johnsalvatier.org/blog/2017/reality-has-a-surprising-...

For most of my life, I didn’t. I’m in my late 30s now, and a year or two back I walked into a grocery store and the reality of what that store represented absolutely floored me.

It’s absolutely stunning to think about the number of humans involved in making my process of acquiring food simple. Not just the farms and processing centers and canneries, etc. but the sum total of human knowledge required to make it all happen.

I started to pay more attention to “mundane” things, and started to realize mundane is just a label that limited my perspective.

We live in this push-button world where most of what we interact with is an abstraction on top of an abstraction on top of an abstraction. The fact that I can literally push a button and food shows up at my door makes it easy to lose touch with the reality of how utterly incredibly that is.

I’ve started to intentionally spend time each day paying closer attention to the basic things. Making dinner can be a mind blowing experience if you bring your full attention to it and ponder the reality of how dinner is possible. The sheer number of other humans we each depend on without realizing it is staggering. There are unlimited opportunities for this kind of exploration.

I’ve some to see it as some kind of “spiritual awakening”, although I think those are really loaded words. But in essence a cultivation of a broader awareness of the inherent complexity and interconnectedness of everything we interact with.

It brings a kind of awe and wonder that has deeply shifted my perspective and worldview, and has made me want to engage more fully with everyday things.

And it’s fun as hell.

You should check out "Connections" by James Burke.
This was brought into sharp focus during Covid and the supply chain break down. We are so incredibly reliant on so many points in the chain and we take it all for granted. When it works its incredible and when we get a single point of failure, everything breaks down.
> the sum total of human knowledge required to make it all happen.

A couple weeks ago, some idiot wandered into /r/farming with a question and immediately pissed off everyone by referring to "the simple process of growing food."

It really is unfortunate that most people don't think about where food comes from beyond it somehow showing up at the grocery store.

> I walked into a grocery store and the reality of what that store represented absolutely floored me.

During a state visit to Johnson Space Center Boris Yeltsin decided to make an impromptu stop at a supermarket. He was floored by the selection and prices. Apparently that was the moment that inspired him to leave the communist party and begin economic reforms in Russia.

I have this exact same experience about every other time I walk into a grocery store as well. It's hard not to be in awe of the amount of time and effort that went into every single one of those thousands of products. Multiple people studied for years to learn the skills required to create a small part of just one of those products.

> I’ve some to see it as some kind of “spiritual awakening”, although I think those are really loaded words. But in essence a cultivation of a broader awareness of the inherent complexity and interconnectedness of everything we interact with.

Imagining the hordes of humans and machinery behind the simplest of products is truly awe inspiring.

Of course there's an XKCD for that. https://xkcd.com/676/

Practicing "mindfulness" is a sure way to a more zen life.

You'll get less done :-P but you'll be more zen about it.

George H.W. Bush (the father not the son) actually expressed a thought like that about supermarket scanners at a grocers convention[0] while he was running for re-election. The New York Times used this to falsely portray Bush as unfamiliar with supermarket scanners. Of course the lie ended up being better remembered than the debunking so it hurt Bush and may have cost him re-election.

[0]: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Supermarket_scanner_moment

> may have cost him re-election

Perhaps, but I suspect “read my lips, no more taxes” and Ross Perot taking a large chunk of republican voters might have more to do with it.

Perot got almost 20% of the vote which is huge amount for a third party candidate, and being a succesful buisnessman and outsider as opposed to the government bureaucrat Bush made him appeal to many traditionally republican voters.

Perot supposedly drew equal numbers of voters from both sides, and I can see how that would be the case. If you wanted an “outsider”, Clinton was the governor of a small southern state who openly flouted political norms and was affectionately nicknamed “Bubba”. (In reality he was groomed for the ruling elite from his youth, but at the time people still fell for the Bubba act, just like they did less than 20 years previously for “Jimmy” Carter). The country wasn’t as polarized back then, or at least was polarized differently. Perot carved out his own lane in a lot of ways, but for every conservative Republican who was upset at Bush, there was probably a unionized auto worker and lifelong Democrat who was upset at Clinton for selling out on NAFTA.
> Perhaps, but I suspect “read my lips, no more taxes” and Ross Perot taking a large chunk of republican voters might have more to do with it.

Your analysis is correct, but the quote was slightly different:

"Read my lips, no new taxes"

GHWB also lied during the presidential debates. Afterward, his staff said, basically 'oops, sorry for the error'. That is, they were relying on Brandolini's Law to hold - and for people to believe the lie.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Brandolini%27s_law?useskin=vec...

OK, obligatory joke: "How do you know a Politician is Lying?" "Her/His/Their/Its Lips are Moving!" ok, maybe 1% of a joke.....

> Of course the lie ended up being better remembered than the debunking so it hurt Bush and may have cost him re-election.

How far we've come. Today, politicians use lies to win elections.

Version of this is happening right now with the Trump "Bloodbath" comment. He is clearly speaking in the context of automobile manufacturing but the media has spun it to insinuate he is threatening violence. Personally I very much dislike Trump but the media spin on this from supposedly neutral news companies is egregious.
“Now if I don’t get elected, it’s going to be a bloodbath for the whole — that’s gonna be the least of it, it’s going to be a bloodbath for the country. That’ll be the least of it. But they’re not going to sell those cars.”

It’s clear he introduced his bloodbath metaphor in the context of talking about the auto industry. But it seems as he was saying it he had this thought - that the bloodbath wouldn’t just be confined to the auto industry. “… it’s going to be a bloodbath for the country. That’ll be the least of it.” The ‘bloodbath’ he expects in the auto industry is in his mind an example of a more widespread threat. A ‘bloodbath for the country’.

Pretending his use of this language isn’t connected to a larger apocalyptic narrative he’s selling is disingenuous.

Everything he stated was in the context of the auto industry. Pulling it out of context and then applying your own interpretation is the disingenuous action. You and the media have added your own spin to a completely out of context statement. Don't get me wrong, I think Trump us dangerous but people and media doing this and misleading about what he said works to his benefit. It erodes trust in the news.
Here's the article: https://www.nytimes.com/1992/02/05/us/bush-encounters-the-su...

You seem very convinced that the NYT pulled this notion from thin air and Bush was experiencing a moment of wonder towards everyday technology (the theme of this thread).

After reading the article, I believe this is the first electric scanner Bush saw. Bush is quoted saying "This is for checking out?" "I just took a tour through the exhibits here," "Amazed by some of the technology."

"Some grocery stores began using electornic scanners as early as 1976, and the devices have been in general use in American supermarkets for a decade."

This tells me that he hadn't been to a grocery store with this technology, which seems very plausible for many politicians, then and now. They have people to do that for them, they're out of touch (at least to some degree).

All the time! It's actually really nice to read this, as I always feel a bit lonely in this regard -- this perspective is unfortunately rare, it seems.
I don't marvel at it. The scale of it all and understanding the destruction of nature for it all is very distressing to me. It does make me wonder "why?" and if it's all really required for a healthy modern life.
(comment deleted)
People that I meet that don't share this kind of feeling and are not impressed at all by the complexity of the mundane are very disappointing to me... sorry, but it's a way I have to judge people very quickly
I used to think this line of thinking was a bit elitist¹, but I find that I also get a bit depressed by people who simply don't look up at birds. It could just be a lack of eyesight, but I find even with people great eyesight, just wont look up, and I perceive it as a general lack of any curiosity about the world around them.

1: and it is elitist to a degree, if you believe these people will never develop the interest. I live in the knowledge that they will, and that we're all late bloomers in some certain respect.

I was once standing at a bus stop when I heard the sound of a large radial engine. Looked up to see a Lockheed Constellation flying overhead! Not a single other person standing at the bus stop or walking past looked up.
Recently I was repairing a BambuLab A1 mini 3D printer.

Man, there is a lot of thought and tech in those things!

So yeah, sometimes I Marvel.

See also Louis CK's "Everything is amazing and no one is happy" clip.

I have similar thoughts occasionally. Like how amazing common materials are like plastic or fabric or aluminum foil. YouTube channels like Primitive Technology make you appreciate how difficult it is to refine materials from nature as a "solo dev".

If you want to go all the way down the rabbit hole, you can follow along with John Plant on YouTube, he started with a well chosen rock, and got to an Axe, fire, kilns, huts, and recently has been smelting iron source from the iron eating(?) bacteria in a local stream.[1] He generally doesn't talk, but explains things in the subtitles if you turn them on.

Machining for me, is the particular course I took... I find the whole subject fascinating, especially making gears, and gear shaped objects, which I did for 5 years. I hadn't realized until that point that properly made involute gears have a rolling contact, they never slide against each other. That's how they last so long.

Look into Precision, especially Gage Blocks, for some fascinating things.

[1] https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCAL3JXZSzSm8AlZyD3nQdBA

> If you want to go all the way down the rabbit hole, you can follow along with John Plant on YouTube

He's better known by the name of his channel, Primitive Technology. Most viewers probably don't know his name. Unlike most YouTubers, he never speaks to the camera (or speaks at all), and rarely writes about himself.

When I finally got my own set of Gage Block, I finally deeply realized how important they were/are to worldwide precision product design.

I would like to add "measurement" to high precision as well to these lists. Our ability to do accurate measurements allowed observation of phenomena otherwise hidden. (e.g. with a 4.5 digit DMM, you'll get a solid, stable reading. With a 9-digit DMM, you'll see a 'random walk' in the LSDs - caused by all sorts of interesting phenomna)

> With a 9-digit DMM, you'll see a 'random walk' in the LSDs - caused by all sorts of interesting phenomna)

Can you elaborate on this some?

I always find cars (especially ICE cars) more impressive than more "advanced" technologies like airplanes or spaceships.

To make cars, it not only requires technical sophistication, but also needs to be reliable enough to be operated by ordinary person everyday and be extremely affordable. The more i think about it, the more it sounds like a miracle.

The affordable part isn't a miracle or anything amazing, it's simply the product of huge economies of scale. If airplanes were made in the hundreds of millions per year, they'd be a lot cheaper too (still a lot more than cars because of the materials and labor costs).

But you're right about the reliability aspect: cars really are a lot more reliable than airplanes, in that they don't need lots of frequent maintenance. If you compare modern cars with cars from 50+ years ago, the difference is staggering. Ask your grandparents sometime about how long their cars lasted, and how much maintenance they needed. You can see it in old advertisements from those times: cars needing lubrication every 1k miles, for instance.

> If you compare modern cars with cars from 50+ years ago, the difference is staggering

This - even 30 years ago, if you were doing a 4 hour+ journey, there was a pretty decent chance your car would break down at some point. It would be on your mind. Nowadays, it’s really almost unheard of, to the point where people don’t even think about it.

It really impresses me that a typical ICE can run at thousands of RPM for years on end with relatively minimal maintenance, and then then it's not the pistons and engine block that will fail first.
Related: designer Thomas Thwaites had the same thought and created a toaster from scratch, starting with iron ore: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=14942190

Ted Talk: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5ODzO7Lz_pw

> In the end he put together a haggard-looking stripped-down version of something we can buy for the price of a sandwich. It only took him nine months, several trips across country lines, and a many moments of lateral thinking. He did plug it in once, but because he wasn't able to make insulation for the wires, the toaster started melting itself about 5 seconds in. Thwaites considers it a partial success.

Sometimes it's equally surprising to me that some people have so much time on their hands to pursue things like this...

Or he worked tirelessly on this for 9 months, and had no free time for anything else. But many things came of it for him, and it had an impact (it’s still being quoted now.)
After sleeping and working, most people have several hours a day left over.

Time into which they have to fit eating, cooking, cleaning, showering, laundry, shopping, commuting, exercising, childrearing, family, professional development, dating, socialising, home maintenance, personal paperwork, pursuing hobbies, and relaxing.

You can have a lot of time for one of those - if you're willing to prioritise it over all the others.

> the toaster started melting itself about 5 seconds in. Thwaites considers it a partial success.

and the difference between that diy contraption and this fancy old toaster is like a difference between a skateboard and a car https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1OfxlSG6q5Y

Even things that aren't too complicated (extruding plastic beads into credit card thickness) lead to increasing the rate of production until producing them becomes complex again. Just trimming the edges off the plastic sheets involved roller tension, knife angle, tear angle, and heat shrinkage that got the better of me some days.
(comment deleted)
Always cherish the feeling of joy, no matter how it presents itself.