Living in Seattle, there are certain parts of downtown that I would normally feel comfortable walking through but was warned by locals about gun and drug violence.

There are many examples of lost tourists in Mexico or South America that get approached by drug traffickers on YouTube.

It is extremely difficult to go wrong in Vietnam, but there are many places that appear peaceful but are actually run by crime.

Of course when I visited her home town and walked up a hill for the view one afternoon, I didn't think that much about a syringes off the side of the trail, but her family lost their minds that I had been in the most dangerous part of the city, "people are killed there all the time".

We are terrible about judging dangerous areas outside of our cultural experience. Many westerner's can't even identify a RedLight area in Asia, "Why are all those women wearing such short dresses?", "all those girls (actually boys) are really dressed up nice".

Not in an of itself, you are right, but I do enjoy the happenstance encounters along the way. Like the time I was aimlessly walking through a neighbourhood in a far off city, heard someone holler in my direction, and out of that was invited in to join their barbecue. I don't remember the rest of the walk at all, but I sure do remember the fun people I met and the great time I had there.

I get what the writer is getting at, and I think some of his ideas are fine. I envy his travel time. And I'll have to make my way to the tips on packing, because the one time I did go overseas, I way overpacked.

FWIW I do enjoy walking around town aimlessly - if you haven't done it, you should try. It's how I've experienced Boston, New York, Munich, Belgrade and San Francisco. Of course I find a few places online that I should check out, like the fortress in Belgrade or the Eisbock and gardens in Munich. But "aimless walking" through ubran areas is the essence of peace for me. I am rarely happier.

For urban/semi-urban travel (i.e. don't require a lot of specialized gear/just in case supplies) carry-on is pretty doable for most people--though I wouldn't go as far as tiny backpack. It requires a certain mindset. You're not going to have a lot of outfits and may be dressed on the downscale side if you go to nice restaurants, etc. Make a lot of things do double/triple duty. You may be washing some clothes in the hotel sink. You're prepared to buy something you need in a pinch.

I'm not fanatical about it and do carry enough stuff to want to drop off a bag wherever I'm staying but rarely check luggage either.

When I travel via air, I wear the least compressible shoes possible (boots) on the plane and squeeze loafers or tennis shoes in the bag. My blue jeans are upscale enough to look casual but also look well at dinner. And yes, at least one nice shirt is needed for dining out or looking decent at a bar.

Recently (pre-pandemic) when I was doing a lot of travel I did optimize my clothing somewhat for synthetics and merino wool that could be easily washed and dried quickly. And, yes, I usually have walking shoes--whether they're trail shoes or leather walking shoes depends on the trip and some sort of very compact light shoe as backup etc. Also a couple little kits that have all sorts of cables, repair items, basic first aid...

The other - just like I don't follow Richard Stallman's extremism but find some of his ideas interesting, I think she of the mentality in the blog post could be applicable to most people. For example, staying in a hip neighborhood in Paris for a couple of weeks but taking half a day to visit some niche "people just live here" suburbs or countryside.

There is something to "not being a stereotypical tourist" but that's easy enough to do by being polite, and paying attention to what is going on, and wandering off the beaten path now and then.

Visiting off-season can be a great deal, especially if you're not concerned with weather (for example, if you're going to be visiting museums in Rome, they will be open during the rain as well as the shine).

"This style of travel, of aiming to be a local, isn’t for everyone. I’m blessed with a lot of free time, and it’s best done in weeks, not days."

And

"Traveling is my education, so I treat the question like choosing which course to take. What do I want to learn about this semester? For me, currently that’s faith and religion. So I’ve been trying to go to places of deep faith, and ones different from what I’m familiar with. To see faith as it’s practiced by the average follower, not by the high priests, or the most sacrosanct. The local mosque rather than the Blue mosque"

He really does want to create relationships with the people in the places that he visits. And he's done that for years. His book Dignity chronicles a lot of his writing about the differences between the "front of the classroom" and the "back of the classroom" people. He focuses on trying to just listen and understand how other people live rather than sitting back and judging them based on tiny snippets of their worlds that you see in places like the news.

So this is very much on brand for him, and I applaud him for sharing how he does what he does with us. And FWIW he did come from a very Western elite background as well: PhD in particle physics, bond trader on Wall Street before escaping that life at considerable personal cost to live this life of trying to show us how others live.

i really appreciate that idea as well.

that's why I read the article, seeking ways i could develop more relationships with locals. only, I couldn't appreciate any single piece of advice. I've been to soccer matches and museums and bars, none of them led me to local parties, invitations dinner, sailboat excursions, etc.s

for instance i can come up with a few from my experiences:

- Hitchhike, even when you have money and there is a bus route, is a great way to make an excuse to have a long conversation with a local. It also allows them the opportunity to feel like they're a good person doing a good thing.

- if exploring and you think someone is curious about you, don't keep just walking. take a seat, exaggerate how hot you feel, etc. and often that person will approach and offer you tea or water.

- look for local conventions or clubs that are meeting, and spend a few days learning that subculture and attend as a novice. even if its a totally new field for you, people love evangelizing to newbies at conventions.

You could title the blog post "I care about the people, not the place. This is how that affects my travels".

I would much rather go to an empty museum than something stuffed full of people like the Louvre and I would much rather go to a local sporting even than a Lakers game or something like that.

You are a backpacker so you already embrace the spirit of the article. You already have a purpose to your trip that takes you outside of tourist traps. Tourism packages destinations so they all start to look the same.

You are not a contrarian. You have an alternate path to the same goal.

You can even do this locally (no need to travel). My husband and I started biking and often this takes us to unseen parts of our own community.

My favorite activities in Paris were 'not going to the louvre' and 'not going up the eiffel tower' :)

"Please don't post shallow dismissals, especially of other people's work.": https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html

Arnade is one of the more interesting writers online these days. Tastes vary, of course, but let's try to avoid the middlebrow dismissal thing here. Your comment would be fine without that first bit.

Secondly, I don’t even agree with the parent commenter, but I actually like that HN has some of this middlebrow dismissal. It’s unpleasant and goes too far at times, but it also creates an atmosphere where I know I’m going to get a “real” perspective.

Not telling you what to do here. Just a proposal in case it changes how you and the squad might want to moderate (or not) going forward!

Again, thank you for all that you do.

I understand the impulse to take someone's work and reduce it to a single obvious gesture of stupidity - it feels good because it feels like one has explained something and expunged an irritant - but it isn't fair and it isn't what this forum is for.

There's another guideline that applies to cases like this too:

"Please respond to the strongest plausible interpretation of what someone says, not a weaker one that's easier to criticize. Assume good faith."