My point was more about fixing a washing machine, toy or some other product to avoid buying  new and throwing the old one out – not the relocation of things we already consider waste.

So, I think the explanation as to why that math and logic is poor might be something else. Because that double/halve seems to work?

Case 2: I replace the capacitors (preventively, or after failure) and prolong the screen’s useful life to (say) 5 years (and it can be more).

The difference is three screens that didn’t have to be made, bought, and thrown away.

I think most people would say that that would actually go a long way towards fixing everything.

If you don’t want a fancy bike, get a simple one.

But don’t imagine you speak for everyone when you say you don’t want aerospace grade hardware.

The problem is that if you buy things along the lines of this manifesto – which I do as a matter of course because it just makes sense – you buy stuff that doesn’t need improvement or repair very much (if at all). Since I bought the sugru a couple months ago, nothing I use has broken (at least, not in a way that sugru can help) and nothing really needs improvement.

I have a few ideas of things to do with it, but I feel like I’d get a lot more use out of it if I didn’t buy things along the lines of this manifesto. Back in college when I cheaped out on most things, I would have been able to find a lot of use for the stuff. Nowadays, not so much.