[HN Gopher] Show HN: Van, truck or car camp for $0 a night
___________________________________________________________________
Show HN: Van, truck or car camp for $0 a night
Author : chaseadam17
Score : 120 points
Date : 2023-07-11 20:17 UTC (2 hours ago)
(HTM) web link (www.landcamp.org)
(TXT) w3m dump (www.landcamp.org)
| gffrd wrote:
| > All members are vetted
|
| By who? There's literally zero information that would make me
| trust this: who's running this, how's it backed up, what proof
| you have that this works.
|
| But, cool idea. Love the reciprocity focus. Kind of like
| couchsurfing, but shinier?
| vuln wrote:
| > trust me bro
|
| It's an MVP to capture interest. Simple As.
| gffrd wrote:
| So, they're missing the V then.
| Reubend wrote:
| Looks really interesting! I guess the big disappointment for me
| was that it's actually a $100 annual subscription. I thought from
| your title that it would be free.
| mathgeek wrote:
| Agreed. Even if it's technically $0 a night, the bait and
| switch feeling will alienate a lot of folks. Just be honest up
| front.
| solardev wrote:
| So it's kinda like Couchsurfing.com and Warmshowers, but
| expensive ($100/yr) and only for vanlifers? Interesting.
|
| I like the community peer to peer model, but it kinda feels
| exploitative to put an expensive business layer on top of it.
| What does the $100/yr provide that Couchsurfing's $30/yr doesn't,
| aside from a feeling of exclusivity? Or is that the point, to
| weed out poor vanlifers and allow only rich vacationers to swap
| hosting with each other?
| sfpotter wrote:
| > Or is that the point, to weed out poor vanlifers and allow
| only rich vacationers to swap hosting with each other?
|
| I'm gonna go with "yes" purely based on the website's design.
| solardev wrote:
| It does have that country club, "no need to park with the
| peasants" vibe to it, doesn't it?
| mrb wrote:
| "rich vacationers" ? Most American adults can afford $100/year.
|
| Edit: I'll even add: most american adults spend $100 per
| _month_ , not per year, on frivolous stuff. Fast food. Cable
| TV. Unnecessary high-end phones (instead of mid-range phones).
| All these people could definitely afford $100/year.
| solardev wrote:
| I think that's a pretty privileged viewpoint. That's
| $100/year of disposable income for maybe a parking spot where
| you want to go, maybe available when you want to go. That's
| definitely not a trivial dollar amount for something like
| that, especially when there are free alternatives (strip mall
| parking lots, rest stops, federal lands, moving between
| neighborhoods, etc.). Then there's the question of being able
| to offer a designated parking spot (hosting) in exchange for
| staying credits. Paid private parking, especially extra
| spots, is an absurd luxury in much of the country, for many
| people.
|
| I knew many people -- climbers, travelers, dirtbaggers,
| backpackers -- who really wanted to see the public lands that
| they partially own but could not afford to travel in luxury,
| people who ate ramen and rice and beans for months just to be
| able to afford to see the lands. There are also people who
| live in campers and vans because they can't afford rent. That
| $100 could definitely go to better uses.
|
| If $100 is nothing to you, perhaps you're the kind of
| traveler this website is targeting. It's definitely not for
| everyone. I've met many amazing people on Couchsurfing and
| Warmshowers, which (at the time) were totally free and still
| today are much cheaper. The vast majority of the people I
| hosted were very poor but very well traveled, with stories to
| tell and friendships across the world. Very few of the rich
| people I've met have had the same experiences to share.
| Hosting them was a privilege, and not something I would've
| wanted to charge them for even if I could. I also met very
| interesting hosts traveling the same way, because at the end
| day doing that becomes way more relational and way less
| transactional -- the opposite of luxury travel.
| jmspring wrote:
| $100/year, $0.27/day is not in the realm of privilege. The
| groups you mention spend more than that a year to upgrade
| gear/etc. I call bollocks on this.
| solardev wrote:
| I think this is missing the point. It's not "Can I afford
| $100 for a year's worth of travel", it's that communities
| have been sharing hosting/staying for a long time
| already, for free or nearly free. Then suddenly a new
| company shows up, offers the same service, but now wants
| to charge hosts and guests $100/yr for doing the same
| thing as before. Why should they pay that? What does the
| new company offer?
|
| FWIW, it is a genuine question, and depending on the
| answer could make the service actually very valuable. For
| example (only):
|
| * If they manually vet each member not just with a basic
| ID check (ID.me etc.) but also with a background check
| and a Zoom interview, or otherwise improve community
| trust and relationships
|
| * If they provide a built-in calendar/scheduling system
| and provide support for last-minute cancellations,
| rebookings, etc.
|
| * If they provide vastly superior UX or support compared
| to Couchsurfing and Warmshowers
|
| * If they provide support for international travelers,
| especially for accidents, medical issues, translations,
| whatever. But so far this seems to be within California
| only.
|
| But from their website it's not clear that such value-
| adds are being done, so then the question is not whether
| $100/yr is affordable, it's what $100/yr gives you that
| $30/yr does not. If you're rich, that's not a big deal.
| If you're poor, that $70 a year DOES make a difference.
| renewiltord wrote:
| Yeah, if I'm going to be honest, if you can't afford
| $100/yr you can't afford to host, so you're not going to be
| a contributor to their community. Looks like the filter is
| working.
| lacrimacida wrote:
| Not only that but for many, paying $100 a year would
| bring a sense of security of choosing a legit service,
| service which could be very unsafe without a proper
| identification and that's where the registrant's payment
| could establish some traceability in case something goes
| bad. Paying $100 also puts a price on account abuse for
| registrants too. I don't think paying for a service is a
| bad thing and don't think it is expensive at all. Someone
| has to maintain the service, even if that's a one dev
| shop. I don't consider myself priviledged at all as I'm
| not in a very rosy financial situation and think twice or
| more before spending any dollar. Ok, I have food and
| shelter, I'm not dirt poor but do live paycheck to
| paycheck as modestly as I can. There's an utopic idea of
| free community service but that requires someone to put
| work in, either volunteer or pay some.
| solardev wrote:
| Hosting is actually free (as it should be).
|
| I used to be very active on Couchsurfing and have hosted
| dozens of travelers -- to rave reviews, and much more
| often than I stayed. It doesn't cost me anything to share
| a couch (or a room, on the rare occasion I had a spare).
| What I'm objecting to is the website taking $100/yr --
| for what? It's unclear -- on principle, when communities
| like it have existed for far cheaper and far longer. It
| seems to exploit both the hosts and the guests. I
| understand some overhead (especially when it comes to
| trust and safety) but it's not clear to me why that price
| point is necessary when alternatives can offer the same
| service for much less.
| renewiltord wrote:
| How can hosting possibly be free? You need a parking spot
| and a restroom to offer.
| kevinsundar wrote:
| You can't use land camp if you don't own a home / property
| that has parking space and restrooms. At least after your 3
| free stays are done.
| notahacker wrote:
| Or put another way, you pay at least $33/night for the
| right to park a van in one or more undisclosed locations in
| California for a maximum of three nights. Not sure how that
| compares with local campsites cost-wise, but it isn't quite
| free.
|
| Any additional benefit you may be able to obtain is
| contingent upon other people wanting to park on your lawn
| for an equivalent number of nights _first_ , which implies
| you're probably not in the can't afford a campsite bracket,
| is probably more hassle than paying for a campsite, and
| isn't much use if you're looking to stop for four nights
| somewhere in the near future...
|
| Other sites charge less for the right to stay 365 days a
| year at thousands of actual photographed locations without
| being a California homeowner with parking space, and waive
| the fee if you host.
| mrb wrote:
| Correct, but solardev was criticizing the $100/yr price,
| specifically.
| jmspring wrote:
| And if you own a home, $100 is _NOTHING_ compared to all
| costs incurred.
| throwawaaarrgh wrote:
| Couchsurfing's downfall was lack of money (and incredibly poor
| use of funds) that led to the sale to the bizarre monetizing
| and "creepy engagement" scheme that ruined it. I would pay
| $300/yr if it would restore the Couchsurfing community and
| original site.
|
| If this $100 site led to the kind of community we used to have,
| it's a bargain. But it's not clear yet whether they will foster
| a community.
| solardev wrote:
| I sadly stopped hosting a few years ago. What happened to the
| community/site? I must've missed that part?
| ghuntley wrote:
| I've been doing this for the last couple years down here in
| Australia. Wrote some words over at
| https://ghuntley.com/freecamping/ about where to find spots etc.
| supportengineer wrote:
| Genius! And local too. Take my investment dollars.
| solardev wrote:
| For anyone looking for actually free, no strings attached (and no
| subscription) camping, check https://freecampsites.net/ instead.
| It's a community wiki of free camp sites, usually on federal
| lands of various sorts (National Forests and BLM lands often have
| primitive campsites with fire rings and not much else). It's
| great for travel around national parks, especially. But please do
| leave no trace, pack out what you bring in.
|
| Edit: I should add that much of federally protected lands are
| free to camp on, within certain limits that I can't remember
| offhand. Things like no more than X days within a month, must be
| further than Y from a street or river, may or may not need a fire
| permit, etc. Even if undocumented and unlabeled on a map, you can
| typically just pull off the road and camp alongside, perfectly
| legally. It's part of their intended use, though that's never
| really made clear to the public.
|
| What this website provides isn't the land itself (which is paid
| for by taxpayers) but _curation_ , so you can easily find places
| with a good view, cell reception, fire rings, minimal traffic and
| whatnot. A lot of national lands aren't exactly desirable to camp
| on even if you're totally within your rights to do so.
| tastyfreeze wrote:
| Not sure if this is true in other states. In Alaska you are
| allowed to camp on State of Alaska land for 7 days in one
| location. Often state land is within a few miles of a
| community. State Parks on the other hand often cost a few bucks
| a night.
| Magi604 wrote:
| Wow this resource is amazing. Looks like it works well for
| Canadian sites too. Thanks for sharing.
| zucked wrote:
| Everything you wrote is bang on - please, please, PLEASE: Leave
| no trace. Haul out your garbage. Don't shoot, shit, or camp
| within 100 yards of streams, creeks, or rivers. Don't make fire
| rings where they already exist. Abide by fire restrictions that
| might vary by county. Stay on existing, marked hiking and motor
| vehicle trails.
|
| As a resident of the West (which has huge swaths of "public"
| land) I am so tired of folks coming to "camp" on public land
| and just absolutely trashing the place. We're losing access to
| land because people can't be bothered to dig proper cat holes
| for their shit, pick up their trash, and they're just setting
| up semi-permanent #vanlife outposts. All these great free spots
| are getting overrun by people who have no common sense and
| slowly by slowly they're turning into paid, reservable spots.
| jmspring wrote:
| Also, you leave out (which the comment you mentioned does) -
| please respect local rules. For instance, in Death Valley,
| you can free camp most anywhere (refer to NPS guidelines) two
| miles off of a designated roadway.
| webnrrd2k wrote:
| But try to be aware of what you're signing up for: Death
| Valley Germans [0]
|
| [0] https://www.otherhand.org/home-page/search-and-
| rescue/the-hu...
| zucked wrote:
| Yes - 100%. There is zero excuse for not knowing/abiding by
| local rules/regulations. The USFS, BLM, and others have
| troves of information posted online.
|
| A local area has gone to great lengths to put up signage
| stating that unlicensed off-highway vehicles are NOT
| ALLOWED to travel the main stretch of USFS fire road. So
| what are people doing? Screaming up and down that very road
| on unlicensed off-highway vehicles at 2/3x the posted speed
| limit. Shooting is supposed to be confined to specific
| areas with backstops - instead you've got dingbats firing
| off hundreds of rounds into valleys with NO BACKSTOP and
| they aren't even cleaning up their brass.
|
| It's a goddamn shit show.
| livueta wrote:
| To add to all of this great info, to any prospective
| dispersed campers: please use high-quality, recent,
| ideally official maps of your choosing to ensure you're
| on the sort of land you think you are. Boundaries can
| change and notes on spots aren't always up to date. My
| area involves a mix of national park, national forest,
| DNR land, and private land, and I regularly see dispersed
| campers getting ticketed for unwittingly setting up on
| the wrong side of the (unmarked) park boundary. That's
| tame compared to what can happen if you're trespassing on
| private land.
| solardev wrote:
| That's a really good point. Although not every agency
| produces good dispersed campsite maps, they typically do
| have at least boundary maps on their website.
| zucked wrote:
| Avenza (iOS/Android app) has done all the heavy lifting -
| you can download area maps and your position will be
| shown correctly on the map if you allow location
| services. Most of the BLM/USFS land I've been to recently
| produce compatible maps.
| AuthorizedCust wrote:
| > _Don 't make fire rings where they already exist._
|
| I think you mean that we should _only_ use extant fire rings
| and not make new ones?
| Aachen wrote:
| > PLEASE: Leave no trace
|
| Someone once mentioned "Leave it nicer than you found it" as
| a life philosophy, maybe in relation to Japan? I'm not sure
| anymore.
|
| I've taken to that, like when going for a forest walk, even
| if I pick up literally one tiny plastic wrapper, that's still
| leaving the forest better than I found it. Of course,
| pristine is pristine, but if there is trash, go for that good
| feeling and consider an easy thing to do that would improve
| the situation by any amount!
| jrussino wrote:
| Thoreau, in Walden, on borrowing an axe: "The owner of the
| axe, as he released his hold on it, said that it was the
| apple of his eye; but I returned it sharper than I received
| it."
|
| A high school English teacher used this passage to impress
| upon us this same philosophy of "leave it nicer than you
| found it" (in particular, I remember him telling us that
| our parents leave us in his care and he saw it as his job
| to "return us sharper than we were received") and it's one
| of those rare moments that made such a deep impression on
| me I remember it often even decades later.
| aloisdg wrote:
| I know this one as the boy scouts rule: always leave the
| campground cleaner than you found it.
|
| Kind of true for codebase too
| KMnO4 wrote:
| Freecampsites.net is fantastic (minus the UI which leaves a lot
| to be desired, and can be problematic on mobile). I used it
| extensively over the past two months as I roadtripped across
| Colorado/Utah/Arizona/Nevada. It has a neat trip planner
| feature where you put your route and it will show you all the
| places along the route where you can camp.
|
| It's not a complete source of information since it's community
| submitted, so I often cross-reference these other two sites:
|
| https://freeroam.app
|
| https://www.campendium.com/
|
| It's important to read the reviews of each campsite, since
| sometimes they will say things like "road is inaccessible
| without a high clearance vehicle" or "now private land; camping
| is no longer possible".
|
| Also, make sure you pick a few nice places and jot down their
| coordinates BEFORE you get there. In my experience, most BLM
| land doesn't have the best (if any) cell service, so YMMV.
| Paul_S wrote:
| This could work if it was community run and not for profit. A
| business running this has the wrong incentives.
| cypherpunks01 wrote:
| Cool idea! I suppose Couchsurfing is a bit of a philosophical
| predecessor here, but with more of an outdoor/camping bent to it.
| jmspring wrote:
| The van equivalent of couchsurfing.org. I'm going to go with they
| probably are flaunting local laws as to where people can park.
| [deleted]
| JimtheCoder wrote:
| "No Social Obligations"
|
| What does that mean exactly? Or do I want to know...
| [deleted]
| halfstar91 wrote:
| What happens if nobody wants to use your spot to stay in?
| Presumably you never build up credits and can't use the service
| effectively.
| fishtoaster wrote:
| Probably an interesting business challenge. I could see a few
| options:
|
| 1. Add the ability to buy credits. Hurts the "community"
| aspect, but gets around that problem and acts as a revenue
| stream.
|
| 2. "Joe Smith is a new host! Camp at his place for zero credits
| in exchange for writing a review!"
|
| 3. Just accept that people in undesirable locations don't get
| to use the tool.
| fishtoaster wrote:
| This has the feel of a site someone set up to gauge interest
| based on signups, rather than something that actually exists.
| I've never been quite sure how I feel about those: smart product
| testing or disingenuous bait-and-switch?
| JimtheCoder wrote:
| "disingenuous bait-and-switch?"
|
| It's usually done without the actual company name or final
| "brand", so you wouldn't even know about it.
|
| I guess these guys didn't get the memo, if this is actually a
| "demand gauging" website...
| mtmail wrote:
| That's the new first step for startups: build a landing page,
| collect email addresses, only then start building a product.
| Hard to judge from the outside how much already exists (the
| first big image is a stock photo).
|
| https://news.ycombinator.com/showhn.html says signup pages and
| waiting lists are usually off-topic.
| shkkmo wrote:
| Rights, so if this is only a sign up page for a waiting list,
| then this post is not allowed as a Show HN
| pokstad wrote:
| Similar to harvesthosts.com or boondockerswelcome.com
| coding123 wrote:
| $100? what is this paying for. surely $100 from one user can pay
| for the RDS instance and hosting for the entire year.
|
| boondockers welcome was free for a long time before they
| introduced a fee. then they were $30 per year, and now $79.
|
| What makes you better - a newer website, a shorter domain name?
| more chic graphics?
| muti wrote:
| 1 host = 1 credit looks like a problem, similar to how it can be
| hard to build up ratio on well established private torrent
| trackers. The distribution of credits will not be even with many
| hosts building up credits for some nebulous future trip. How do
| those actually travelling around earn credits past the first 3
| complimentary?
|
| Bonus point systems or just ignoring ratio solved this from my
| pov for trackers, the 1 to 1 ratio stood out as something that
| would need a solution long term.
| nicpottier wrote:
| I'm interested but $100/yr kind of sounds like a lot. Is it free
| to host? I wouldn't mind building up credits for a road trip
| later if I didn't have to pay. Also maybe a monthly price would
| make more sense as I tend to be on the road only for periods at a
| time. (or maybe even a per-booking fee?)
|
| Anyways, yearly sub is kind of a non-starter for me though I like
| the concept.
| barbazoo wrote:
| > I'm interested but $100/yr kind of sounds like a lot. Is it
| free to host?
|
| Sounds like it is... maybe?
|
| > Membership is free if you only want to host (great traffic
| for businesses like breweries)
| benatkin wrote:
| It sounds like too little to avoid hosting people who don't
| have a place where host. Someone could pretend another non-host
| user is hosting them and both could use the credits to stay
| with actual hosts. Or they could host someone in the same place
| where they're staying that they don't own or rent.
| VoodooJuJu wrote:
| Nice design. One big thing though, when making an MVP, make sure
| the Product is actually Minimally Viable, because if it's not,
| it's just deceiving, which starts you off in a position of
| negative trust with the prospect. Trust is difficult, sometimes
| impossible to earn earn back.
| yuvadam wrote:
| I tried to build a community once with just a landing page and a
| contact form, it'll be hard - borderline impossible - to
| bootstrap like that.
|
| Nice design though.
| totallywrong wrote:
| $400 per night for a 2-stars hotel? Is that really the case? That
| sounds absolutely insane, even for most 5-stars.
| [deleted]
| walrus01 wrote:
| We've gone from SNL making a skit about "LIVING IN A VAN, DOWN BY
| THE RIVER" to people on instagram doing #vanlife influencer stuff
| about how trendy it is to live in a converted van.
| nonrepeating wrote:
| #vanlife at least aspires to some level of tidy and
| conscientious housekeeping. Motivational speaker Matt Foley
| doesn't have a string of solar-powered faerie lights adorning
| his collapsible breakfast nook. He has a clattering drift of
| beer cans that he can gather up around him for warmth.
| mbgerring wrote:
| Hi, as a former employee of Couchsurfing, I just want to say:
| it's great that you're thinking about revenue and reciprocity
| upfront.
| impissedoff1 wrote:
| Boo, sounds like an email harvest
___________________________________________________________________
(page generated 2023-07-11 23:00 UTC)