Live data from Hacker News

Where Did the Fear of Poisoned Halloween Candy Come From? (2013)

smithsonianmag.com

61–70 of 72 posts

Re: Where Did the Fear of Poisoned Halloween Candy Come From? (2013)

#61

It's been going on longer than the article suggests. When I went trick-or-treating in the 1960s, my parents did not allow us to eat anything that was home-made or not in a sealed package, because they were worried about deliberate poisoning. Around 1972 or 73 on Halloween, some neighborhood kid found a razor blade in an apple. Turned out he'd inserted it himself as a prank. A lot of things have much earlier roots tha…

The real travesty here is that anyone would consider it acceptable to give trick-or-treaters an apple. :)

Re: Where Did the Fear of Poisoned Halloween Candy Come From? (2013)

#62
post #52
post #51

Earlier quoted context omitted.

A lot of times when this is brought up it isn't mentioned there is an assumption here. That we are already at the efficient frontier and any move is necessarily a trade off. In my experience that assumption is usually false. There are usually ways where you can actually reduce the amount of danger and the number of people exposed to it and increase the number of people getting a more efficient service at the same tim…

Agreed. Like Vision Zero[1] which some municipalities have instituted as initiatives to reduce the number of traffic fatalities in their jurisdictions through a variety of measures with the obvious goal of reducing such to the absolute minimum. [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Vision_Zero

Vision Zero is a project that's unable to come to terms with its own beliefs. Their stated goal is zero traffic fatalities no matter the economic cost, and yet they don't actually embrace policies that would reduce fatalities to zero. Their policies seem to merely be the same old stuff you'd see out of traditional planning, but with a little higher cost assigned to injuries and fatalities.

That's good, and it plays nicely to your point that the status quo isn't always at the right balance point, but the hypocrisy is off-putting.

Re: Where Did the Fear of Poisoned Halloween Candy Come From? (2013)

#63
post #42
post #39

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Your permanent neighbors tend to be noisy and drunk occasionally, people renting an airbnb are on holidays and likely to be noisy and drunk, then a week later you'll get a new batch likely to be noisy and drunk.

But does anyone oppose reasonable rules for time-of-day-based noise levels in an apartment or neighborhood? It really doesn’t matter if your permanent neighbors or transient guests are the ones making the noise, either should cause the property owner/renter to get fined/evicted.

Good idea, but guess what? The Airbnb people are gone in the morning, they don’t really care!

Re: Where Did the Fear of Poisoned Halloween Candy Come From? (2013)

#64
post #19

Fears aside, I suspect that the larger tragedy is that Halloween treats are now mostly sugary candy and chocolate. I remember a time when there was much more variety. I also remember how quickly things changed after the first (likely unsubstantiated) scare in my community.

The only variety that I can remember as a kid, was the house on the next street where they gave out Chick Tracts instead of candy.

Today they are almost exclusively pre-packaged candy of well known brands. They used to include a lot more home made products, like cookies, cupcakes, caramel apples, popcorn balls, rice krispy treats, etc.

Re: Where Did the Fear of Poisoned Halloween Candy Come From? (2013)

#65
post #42
post #39

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Your permanent neighbors tend to be noisy and drunk occasionally, people renting an airbnb are on holidays and likely to be noisy and drunk, then a week later you'll get a new batch likely to be noisy and drunk.

But does anyone oppose reasonable rules for time-of-day-based noise levels in an apartment or neighborhood? It really doesn’t matter if your permanent neighbors or transient guests are the ones making the noise, either should cause the property owner/renter to get fined/evicted.

> But does anyone oppose reasonable rules for time-of-day-based noise levels in an apartment or neighborhood?

Even if this were a viable solution, it does nothing for the lost sleep during the months (or in may case, full year) it takes to establish these rules and get them consistently enforced.

Also, it's not a viable solution. There are a couple huge problems.

First, evicting owners is no small thing. In fact, neither is evicting renters. In fact, neither is fining owners/renters for sums of money that would actually cause a change in behavior. These are all very expensive options of last resort that are likely to end in lawyer fees.

Second, with notable exceptions, HOAs/land lords dislike playing mediator/enforcer (and for good reason -- see below). So rules are hard to make and harder to enforce.

Third, there's a real cost imposed on any community that tries to legislate "be a normal neighbor". If you want an enumeration of the potential downsides of this approach, talk to anyone who has had a bad experience with an over-zealous HOA.

You could try to make and enforce a set of rules in a way that solves the problem but doesn't drive normal neighbors insane with pedantic/vindictive rule-violation-reporting. But it turns out that's a rather hard set of rules to come up with/fairly enforce. It's just much easier and, frankly, more effective, to ban airbnb et al.

I'm not opposed to apartment sharing on principle, and in fact my personal political philosophy should bias me toward defending the practice. But my actual experience makes me wary of buildings/neighborhoods that allow airbnb. If airbnb doesn't figure out a solution to this problem, they're going to face increasing resistance.

Re: Where Did the Fear of Poisoned Halloween Candy Come From? (2013)

#66
post #43

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I find that generally it helps, counterintuitively, to start with what the DBT[1] literature calls "validation" - reassuring the person that their fear makes perfect sense in light of their priors. You can call this "affirming the emotional truth of what they're saying" if you want, and -- here's a part that took me years to learn -- you can do it without being dishonest. For example, dialog between Them (T) / You (Y…

I’m not saying that line of argument won’t work, but it’s certainly not one I would take with a friend or acquaintance since you’re effectively lying. I guess you could call it “tact” or “rhetoric,” but I find your suggested opening lines very slimy and dishonest.

How is it lying? They are acknowledging the emotional trigger of the situation without agreeing that it is rational. Sounds to me like exactly how one should approach a disagreement of irrational nature.

Would you mind suggesting an alternative opener, that would also work, that isn’t “slimy”?

Re: Where Did the Fear of Poisoned Halloween Candy Come From? (2013)

#67
post #15
post #7

If anyone knows of a good general technique to persuade a person that their fear of something is overblown, I'd be interested in seeing a link. In my experience, trying to do this results in anger.

I find the same attitude has now permiated American politics. You can say something as neutral as, "I'm very cautious of getting riled up by overblown narratives that lack factual evidence or are presented in an obviously inflammatory manner" and suddenly you're the anti-Christ.

Right, the second you are skeptical of their “source” you are the enemy. No room for doubt.

Re: Where Did the Fear of Poisoned Halloween Candy Come From? (2013)

#68
post #51

Earlier quoted context omitted.

And we also have to consider how much we as a society lose by not having a taxi system with x amount of danger. 1000 people gaining a little bit quickly outweighs 1 person losing a lot (at least from a purely utilitarian perspective)

A lot of times when this is brought up it isn't mentioned there is an assumption here. That we are already at the efficient frontier and any move is necessarily a trade off. In my experience that assumption is usually false. There are usually ways where you can actually reduce the amount of danger and the number of people exposed to it and increase the number of people getting a more efficient service at the same tim…

Excellent point. While you’ll never get to zero, the current state of things is probably far from optimal.

The airline industry provides an extreme example. They go years at a time with no fatalities, while still providing almost ludicrously cheap service.

Re: Where Did the Fear of Poisoned Halloween Candy Come From? (2013)

#69
post #43

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I’m not saying that line of argument won’t work, but it’s certainly not one I would take with a friend or acquaintance since you’re effectively lying. I guess you could call it “tact” or “rhetoric,” but I find your suggested opening lines very slimy and dishonest.

How is it lying? They are acknowledging the emotional trigger of the situation without agreeing that it is rational. Sounds to me like exactly how one should approach a disagreement of irrational nature. Would you mind suggesting an alternative opener, that would also work, that isn’t “slimy”?

It’s explicitly deliberately choosing your words to manipulate the other person, even if technically you’re not saying anything untrue. Perhaps “deceptive” is a better description than “lying.”

Re: Where Did the Fear of Poisoned Halloween Candy Come From? (2013)

#70
post #69

Earlier quoted context omitted.

How is it lying? They are acknowledging the emotional trigger of the situation without agreeing that it is rational. Sounds to me like exactly how one should approach a disagreement of irrational nature. Would you mind suggesting an alternative opener, that would also work, that isn’t “slimy”?

It’s explicitly deliberately choosing your words to manipulate the other person, even if technically you’re not saying anything untrue. Perhaps “deceptive” is a better description than “lying.”

I understand your sentiment, however, I disagree. Acknowledging differing perspectives to your own is something that is beneficial to discussion and mutual understanding.

My wife and I just went through our first session of counseling. The first instructions we received were to begin doing exactly this - before sharing our opinion or feelings, first acknowledge the feelings or statement of the other person, making sure that they feel heard.

Sure, sociopaths can use a similar tactic to manipulate others. Intent matters here.

Have you happened to speak to someone before and felt like they didn't actually listen to you?

Post reply on HN